3Fram  \\\t  Htbraryf  of 

Professor  Ifutamtn  Iri^rktnrtbg^  Marft^lft 

l]equ0atl|0&  bg  I|tm  to 

\\\t  ICtbrar^  of 

f  rtttrrtnn  ®I|Mlngtral  &mtnarQ 

BL  85  .K45  1899 
Kellogg,  Samuel  H.  1839- 

1899. 
A  handbook  of  comparative 

reliaion 


'  /<#?IZ!?^^;^ 


A  HANDBOOK 


OF 


L  :^dl922      * 


£l£6/WL  UUVK^ 


Comparative    Religion 


REV.  S.  H.  KELLOGG,  D.D.,  LL.D. 

MISSIONARY  TO  INDIA, 

AUTHOR    OF 

The  Light  of  Asia  and  the  Light   of  the    World,"    "  The   Genesis  and 
Growth   of  Religion"   "  From   Death   to 
Resurrection,"  etc.,  etc. 


PHILADELPHIA 

THE  WESTMINSTER  PRESS 
1899 


Copyright,  1899,  by  The  Trustee*  of 
The  Presbyterian  Board  of  Publication  and  Sabbath- 
School  Work. 


CONTENTS. 

PAGE 

Prkfack  ......         \ 

CHAPTER  I. 
The  Classification  of  Religions  -  -        1 

CHAPTER  II. 
Fundamental  Agreements  -  -  -        ti 

CHAPTER  III. 

The  Doctrine  of  the  World-Religions  Concern- 
ing God     -  -  -  -  -  -       11 

CHAPTER  IV. 
The  Doctrine  Concerning  Sin      -  -  -      37 

CHAPTER  V. 
The  Doctrine  Regarding  Salvation       -  -      59 

CHAPTER  VI. 
The  Doctrine  Concerning  the  Future  -      90 

CHAPTER  VII. 
Practical  Morals  -  -  -  -    lltJ 

CHAPTER   VIll. 
The  Relation  of  the  World-Religions  to  Chris- 
tianity     ..----     157 
iii 


PREFACE. 


It  might  perhaps  seem  as  if  such  a  brief  and 
incomplete  discussion  of  the  question  of  Com- 
parative Eeligion,  as  is  given  in  the  following 
pages,    would    he   superlluous.     Many  of   the 
ablest   scholars   and  specialists  in  the  Avorld 
have  published  of  late  years  elaborate  discus- 
sions of  the  subject,  which  have  laid  all  stu- 
dents under  lasting  obligations.     It  is  to  be  re- 
gretted, however,  that  to  a  very  great  extent, 
the  general  result  of  the  presentation  of  the 
subject,  so  far  as  it  has  hitherto  been  made 
popularly  accessible,    has    been    to    create    a 
widely  spread  impression  that  the  difference 
between  the  various  religions  of  the  world  has 
formerly  been  greatly  exaggerated ;  and  that, 
in  particular,  the  teaching  hitherto  current  in 
the  Church  as  to  the  exclusive  position  held  by 
Christianity  as  the  one  only  divinely  revealed 
system  of  saving  truth,  is  as  erroneous  as  un- 
charitable. 

It  seems  to  be  imagined  by  many,  that  just 
as  we  ought  to  have  charitv  toward  our  fellow- 


vi  Preface. 

Christians  in  various  sections  of  the  Church  of 
Christ,  who  hold  on  many  points  religious  be- 
liefs different  from  those  wliich  we  have  been 
educated  to  receive,  inasmuch  as  in  all  that 
is  essential  to  true  religion  and  acceptance 
with  God,  we  are  truly  at  one ;  even  so  ought 
we  to  regard  those  who  are  not  even  Christians 
in  name,  but  followers  of  one  or  other  of  the 
great  world-religions.  It  is  strangely  fancied 
that  howsoever  these  may  differ  from  us  in 
many  things,  yet  in  all  things  which  are  essen- 
tial to  man's  eternal  well-being,  they  also  are 
practically  at  one  Avith  Christians ;  so  that,  if 
they  but  carefull}^  live  up  to  the  precepts  and 
observances  prescribed  in  their  several  reli- 
gions, it  is  thought  that  it  is  onh^  charitable  to 
suppose  that  their  prospects  for  the  life  to 
come  may  be,  on  the  whole,  as  good  as  our 
own. 

The  practical  bearing  of  opinions  of  this 
kind  is  only  too  obvious.  When  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  was  about  to  ascend  into  heaven, 
He  gave  unto  Plis  disciples  orders,  in  the 
clearest  possible  terms,  to  preach  His  gospel 
in  all  the  world,  to  every  creature ;  and  that 
with  the  object  of  making  men  who  were 
disciples  of  Buddha  or  Confucius,  or  worship- 
ers of  Jupiter  or  other  of  the  gods  of  Greece 


Preface,  vii 

and  Ivome,  disciples  to  Himself,  and  worship- 
ers of  the  one  God  and  Father,  whom  He  de- 
clared that  He  had  come  into  the  world  to  re- 
veal unto  men.  If,  liowever,  the  view  of  the 
other  religions  of  tlie  world  which  we  have 
just  indicated,  be  correct,  then  it  certainly 
seems  much  of  an  impertinence  that  men 
should  undertake  a  proselytizing  work  of  this 
kind ;  and  it  is  only  natural  that  people  who 
cherish  such  a  view  of  the  non-Christian  reli- 
gions, should  withhold  from  Christian  missions 
both  their  service,  their  means,  and  their  sym- 
pathy. As  a  matter  of  fact,  I  have  observed, 
during  many  years'  residence  in  India,  and  an 
acquaintance  more  than  usually  extensive  with 
missions  and  missionaries  in  every  part  of  the 
world,  that  men  and  women  who  entertain  so 
favorable  views  of  the  various  ethnic  religions, 
as  all  alike  more  or  less  perfect  revelations  of 
the  mind  and  will  of  God,  are  very  rarely 
found  in  the  missionary  ranks.  But  this  is 
only  what  we  should  naturally  expect. 

If  then  the  facts  set  forth  in  the  following 
pages  with  regard  to  the  most  important  of 
these  religions  in  the  world  of  to-day,  shall 
prove  helpful  in  enlightening  any  as  to  their 
actual  teachings,  or  correct  in  any  case  the 
very   radical   and    serious    misconceptions   on 


viii  Preface. 

this  subject,  which,  we  fear,  are  already  begin- 
ning to  show  their  effect  in  dulling  the  mis- 
sionary zeal  of  many  professed  Christians,  one 
great  object  of  the  writer  will  be  attained. 

It  may  not  be  amiss  to  remark  that  this 
book  has  been  perforce  written  under  great 
disadvantage,  on  account  of  the  impossibility 
of  access  to  many  valuable  sources  of  illustra- 
tion such  as  abound  in  libraries  in  Great 
Britain  and  America ;  for  in  such  a  small  and 
out-of-the-way  station  as  has  been  of  late  the 
author's  home  in  India,  such  helps  are  prac- 
tically not  obtainable.  I  will  only  venture  to 
hope  that  for  this  lack  some  slight  compensa- 
tion may  be  found  in  the  writer's  many  years 
of  residence  and  familiarity  with  the  life  and 
language  of  the  people,  in  such  a  great  non- 
Christian  land  as  India. 

S.  H.  Kellogg. 

Landoub,  Mussoorie,  North  India, 
July,  1898. 


A  HANDBOOK 

OF 

COMPARATIVE    RELIGION. 

CHAPTER  I. 

THE   CLASSIFICATION    OF   RELIGIONS. 

At  first,  to  the  casual  observer,  the  various 
religions  of  mankind  seem  to  present  such  a 
chaos  of  conflicting  beliefs  as  to  defy  classi- 
fication. Upon  somewhat  fuller  and  more  ex- 
act knowledge,  however,  it  becomes  quite  pos- 
sible to  bring  all  under  a  few  distinct  and  com- 
prehensive heads.  First,  we  have  the  theistic 
religions,  of  which,  at  present,  Christianity, 
Judaism,  and  ^lohammedanism,  are  the  chief 
examples.  In  the  second  place,  we  have  the 
pantheistic  religions,  of  which  the  most  im- 
portant example  is  found  in  the  popular  reli- 
gion of  the  Hindoos.  Thirdly,  paradoxical 
though  it  may  seem,  we  have  atheistic  reli- 
1 


2        Handhook  of  Comparative  Religion. 

gions.  Such  appears  to  be  the  Shinto  reli- 
gion of  Japan,  that  of  the  Jains  in  India,  but, 
most  important  by  far,  the  religion  of  the 
Buddha,  who,  in  the  Buddhist  Scriptures,  is 
said  to  have  declared  of  himself  that  nowhere 
among  gods  or  men,  did  he  see  any  one  wliom 
it  would  be  "proper  for  him  to  honor."  In 
the  fourth  place,  we  may  name  the  prevailing 
ancestor  worship  which  is  specially  character- 
istic of  Confucianism.  Originally,  this  would 
appear  to  have  coexisted  w4th  a  general  the- 
istic  belief  in  Shang  Te  as  the  Supreme  God ; 
but  all  agree  that  the  worship  of  the  Supreme 
God  forms  no  part  of  the  Chinese  religion  of 
to-day.  1 

Lastly,  we  liave  a  large  number  of  religions, 
found  for  the  most  part  among  the  uncultured 
races,  which  may  be  classified  in  a  general  way 
as  "  animistic."  In  all  religions  of  this  class, 
the  objects  of  popular  worship  are  spirits  of 
various  grades  of  power  and  importance,  good 
and  evil,  whom  it  is  supposed  to  be  important 
to  propitiate  in  order  to  man's  earthly  well- 
being.  In  some  of  these,  as  in  many  of  the 
religions  of  Africa,  a  Supreme  God  is  dimly 


'Quite  possibly  Confucianism  might  be  properly  classified  with 
Buddhism  as  an  atheistic  velinlon;  but  in  the  official  worship  by 
the  eujperor  in  Pekin,  there  is  still  a  vague  recognition  of  God 
under  the  name  of  Heaven. 


The  Classification  of  Religions.  3 

recognized ;  but  He  is  not  believed  to  have 
anything  to  do  at  present  with  human  affairs, 
and  the  crude  religion  of  the  people  therefore 
is  not  concerned  with  man's  relations  to  Him. 

Polytheism,  as  such,  does  not  appear  in  this 
classification ;  for  the  reason  that  among  dif- 
ferent peoples,  the  popular  polytheism  is  based 
on  very  diverse  presuppositions.  The  polythe- 
ism of  India,  for  instance,  is  grounded  upon, 
and  is  popularly  justified  by,  pantheistic  as- 
sumptions ;  while  that  of  the  Turanian  aborig- 
ines of  India,  such  as  the  Santals,  the  Gonds, 
and  others,  is  animistic ;  though  among  these 
savage  peoples,  the  existence  of  one  great  God, 
above  all  the  spirits  and  demons  whom  they 
worship,  is  commonly  recognized.  With  Him, 
however,  they  believe  that  they  have  nothing 
to  do.  So,  again,  among  the  northern  Bud- 
dhists, we  have  a  type  of  practical  polytheism 
which  rests  upon,  and  is  a  development  from, 
the  atheistic  Buddhism.  Similarly,  nature  wor- 
ship, wherever  it  prevails,  commonly  rests  upon 
either  pantheistic  or  theistic  presuppositions,  or 
else  is  connected  with  animistic  superstitions. 

It  should  be  remarked  that  in  point  of  fact, 
these  different  types  of  religion  above  enumer- 
ated, are  not  in  practice  always  sharply  dis- 
tinct.    For  example,  while  the  popular  Hin- 


4        Handbook  of  Comparative  Religion, 

dooism  of  the  masses  of  the  population  of 
India  is  correctly  described  as  a  pantheistic 
polytheism,  yet  many  religious  observances, 
more  especially  among  the  lower  castes,  are 
undoubtedly  of  an  animistic  type,  and  have 
arisen  from  the  intercourse  of  the  Aryan  Hin- 
doos with  the  aboriginal  Turanian  demon  wor- 
shipers whom  they  found  living  in  the  land 
when  first  they  entered  it,  and  who  still  exist 
to  the  number  of  several  millions,  in  the  more 
remote  and  inaccessible  parts  of  the  country. 
So  also,  although  no  faith  is  more  emphatically 
theistic  than  that  of  Islam,  yet  among  certain 
Mohammedan'  sectaries,  as,  e.  g.,  the  Sufis,  the 
conception  of  the  Deity  has  become  distinctly 
modified  in  the  direction  of  a  mystic  pantheism. 
As  it  were  quite  impossible  within  the  limits 
imposed  upon  the  present  work,  to  consider  all 
the  various  religions  of  each  ij])Q^  ancient  and 
modern,  it  has  been  necessary  to  confine  the 
discussion  to  typical  examples  of  each  type,  as 
existing  in  the  world  of  to-day.  If  animistic 
religions  have  been  but  slightly  treated,  this 
is  simply  because  tlie}^  present  us  with  no  such 
elaborated  system  of  religious  thought  as  we 
find  in  the  religious  systems  of  the  more  culti- 
vated races  of  the  world  ;  so  that  there  is  com- 
paratively little  to  be  said  as  to  the  details  of 


The   Claasijication   of  Religions.  5 

the  religious  beliefs  of  those  who  hold  them. 
But,  as  regards  the  practical  purpose  of  the 
present  book,  this  is  of  the  less  consequence, 
since  Christianity,  Islam,  Buddhism,  and  the 
other  religions  of  China,  Avhich  we  have  con- 
sidered at  length,  together  claim  as  their  ad- 
herents the  immense  majority — probably  not 
less  than  some  1,300,000,000 — of  the  human 
race. 

With  these  prefatory  observations,  we  may 
now  proceed  to  inquire,  What  are  the  teach- 
ings of  the  chief  world-religions  of  to-day  on 
the  fundamental  questions  of  religion  ?  These 
are,  firstly,  the  being,  nature,  and  character,  of 
God;  secondly,  the  relation  of  man  to  Him, 
especially  as  affected  by  the  universal  fact  of 
sin ;  thirdly,  concerning  the  way  of  salvation ; 
fourthly,  concerning  the  future  of  individuals 
and  of  the  world  ;  and,  finalh^  the  question  as 
to  the  duty  of  man  to  God  and  to  his  fellow- 
man. 


CHAPTER  II. 

FUNDAMENTAL  AGREEMENTS. 

It  is  not  without  much  reason  that  man  has 
been  defined  as  '•  a  religious  animal."  If  we 
define  him  as  "a  rational  animal,"  as  some 
have  done,  there  is  left  room  for  discussion ; 
for  it  cannot  well  be  denied  that  many  actions 
of  the  higher  animals  seem  to  indicate  not 
merely  the  operation  of  instinct,  but  also  a 
process  of  true  reasoning.  But  no  one  has 
ventured  soberly  to  maintain  that  some  ani- 
mals are  also  religious.  To  speak  of  the  re- 
ligion of  a  monkey,  a  dog,  or  a  horse,  were 
only  to  excite  a  smile.  Man  only  is  religious ; 
and  in  the  case  of  man,  religion,  in  some  form 
or  other,  often  no  doubt  very  vague  and  ill- 
defined,  is  universal.  It  is  yet  to  be  proved 
that  any  tribe  has  ever  been  found  so  degraded 
as  to  be  utterly  destitute  of  religious  ideas. 
The  assertions  to  the  contrary  which  have 
often  been  made,  have  repeatedly  b}^  further 
investigation  been  shown  to  be  erroneous. 

Xo  doubt  when  we  thus  speak  of  religion  as 
universal,  we  must  use  the  word  "  religion  "  in 
6 


Fuudai/iental  Agreeinents.  7 

a  very  broad  sense;  but  however  broad  the 
sense  in  which  we  take  it,  it  is  still  true  that 
the  possession  of  a  religious  faculty  is  one  of 
the  most  distinctive  characteristics  of  the  hu- 
man race. 

In  any  comparison  of  the  various  religions 
wherein  the  religious  nature  of  man  manifests 
its  activity,  we  shall  do  w^ell  first  to  note  those 
elements  which  are  common  to  all.  All  reli- 
gions, from  the  highest  to  the  lowest,  assume 
the  existence  of  a  Power  (or  powers)  superior 
to  man,  on  which  he  is  dependent,  and  which  j 
is  able  decisively  to  influence  his  destiny.  It ' 
is  also  taken  for  granted  in  all  religions  that 
the  relation  between  man  and  the  superior 
PoAver  or  powers,  is  a  necessary  relation.  Man 
feels  instinctively  that  he  is  born  into  this  re- 
lation, and  that  by  no  power  or  wisdom  of  his 
own  is  he  able  to  free  himself  from  it.  As  to 
the^iatur£LQlthe  Power  assumed,  religions  dif- 
fer. Some  regarcTtEFTower  as  one  and  only ; 
others  assume  a  plurality  of  such  powers.  It  / 
is  however  important  to  observe  that  in  most, 
if  not  all,  cases  where  men  worship  gods  many, 
there  is  discoverable  in  the  background  of  the 
religious  consciousness  the  dim  outline  of  one 
sole  Power,  of  which  the  many  who  are  wor- 
shiped are  either  different  manifestations,  or 


8        Handhool:  of  ComjxtratAve  Religion, 

to  which  they  hold  a  position  strictly  subordi- 
nate. 

More  or  less  distinctly  in  all  religions  is  the 
thought  also  expressed,  that  because  of  man's 
relation  to  this  Supreme  Power,  certain  things 
are  obligatory  on  him,  and  other  things  must 
be  avoided  at  the  peril  of  suffering.  It  is  true 
that  among  many  peoples  morality  has  become 
more  or  less  dissevered  from  religion ;  but  it 
would  probably  be  hard  to  find  a  people  so 
far  degraded  that  there  remained  not  at  least 
some  vague  sense  of  responsibility  for^ June's 
actions  ;  and  this  is  true,  even  although  among 
many  such  the  commonly  accepted  theory  of 
religion  logically  precludes  responsibility. 

In  all  religions,  again,  is  expressed  the  feel- 
ing that  between  man  and  the  Supreme  Power 
or  powers,  something  is  wrong;  in  other 
words,  all  religions  more  or  less  distinctly  ex- 
press or  appeal  to  man's  sense  of  sin.  This  is 
clear  from  various  familiar  facts ;  but  it  is  es- 
pecially evidenced  from  the  wide  prevalence 
of  religious  offerings  and  sacrifices,  designed 
to  propitiate  or  conciliate  the  good  will  of  the 
Being  worshiped,  to  Avhom  the  offerer  feels 
himself  subordinate,  and  Avhose  favor  he  be- 
lieves to  be  necessar}^  to  his  well-being.  The 
significance   of   such  religious  observances  is 


Funclamentid   AgreemenU.  9 

the  greater,  that  in  many  instances  they  have 
maintained  their  place  even  although,  as  in  the 
case  of  Mohammedanism,  the  authoritative 
Book  declares  any  propitiation  of  the  Deity  to 
be  impossible,  or  when,  as  in  Hindooism,  an 
inexorable  logic,  which  is  accepted  practically 
by  not  a  few,  declares  such  ritual  services  to 
be  folly  unworthy  of  a  man  who  has  attained 
the  supreme  wisdom. 

Again,  more  or  less  distinctly,  religions 
generally  assume- that  there  is  for  man  a  state 
of  being  after  death;  and  that  the  conse- 
quences of  wrongdoing  or  right-doing  in  this 
present  life  will  follow  a  man  after  death. 
There  is  no  doubt  a  very  great  difference  in 
the  way  in  which  this  life  after  death  is  con- 
ceived;  and  indeed,  in  some  instances,  as 
notably  in  the  primitive  Buddhism,  the  ortho- 
dox teaching  seems  even  to  deny  the  existence 
of  a  soul  which  can  live  after  the  death  of  the 
body.  And  yet  even  in  Buddhism  one  meets 
with  much  that  seems  inconsistent  with  this 
denial;  while  the  constant  tendency  of  man- 
kind in  such  cases  is  still  to  insist,  despite  the 
philosophers,  on  the  reality  of  a  state  of  future 
rewards  and  retributions.  The  profound  sig- 
nificance of  this  fact  needs  but  to  be  men- 
tioned. 


10      Handhook  of  Comparative  Religion, 

Finally,  it  is  to  be  observed  that  the  general 
acceptance,  in  religions  the  most  diverse,  of  the 
fundamental  beliefs  which  have  been  enumer- 
ated, gives  the  strongest  a  priori  reason  for 
inferring  that  to  these  beliefs  correspond 
veritable  spiritual  realities  in  the  unseen 
world.  For  these  are  beliefs  which  have  been 
so  universally  accepted  in  all  ages  by  men  of 
both  the  highest  and  the  lowest  degree  of 
culture,  that  we  can  hardly  avoid  the  conclu- 
sion that  they  must  be  due  to  a  certain  instinct 
of  man's  nature.  But  where  in  the  whole 
kingdom  of  life  is  there  an  instance  of  an  in- 
stinct or  appetency  universal  in  any  species, 
to  which,  nevertheless,  nothing  whatever  in  its 
environment  corresponds?  Is  it  not  then  in 
the  last  degree  improbable  that  man  should 
exhibit  a  unique  and  solitary  exception  to  a 
law  which  elsewhere  appears  to  be  universal? 
and  that,  too,  in  regard  to  a  matter  which 
most  vitally  concerns  his  conduct  and  happi- 
ness, even  in  this  present  state  of  existence  1 


CHAPTEE  in. 

THE    DOCTRINE     OF    THE     WORLD-RELIGIONS 
CONCERNING  GOD. 

In  any  comparison  of  the  various  religions 
of  mankind,  fundamental  to  all  else  is  tlie  in- 
quiry as  to  what  they  severally  teach  with 
regard  to  the  existence  and  the  nature  of  the 
Supreme  Being. 

Christianity  assumes  the  existence  of  a  God 
who  is  self-existent,  and  therefore  eternal. 
All  else  exists  only  because  He  has  willed  its 
existence;  He  alone  exists  necessarily,  and 
therefore  from  eternity  to  eternity. 

Secondly,  the  God  of  Christianity  is  a 
personal  Being.  By  this  we  mean  that  He  is 
eternally  distinct  and  separate  from  all  other 
beings,  rational  or  irrational,  personal  or  im- 
personal ;  that  He  is  eternally  and  necessarily 
conscious  of  Himself  as  the  eternal  Ego ;  and, 
finally,  that  He  is  possessed  of  the  power  of 
free  self-determination.  In  all  His  acting,  He 
acts,  not  under  any  inner  law  of  physical  ne- 
cessity, as  w^hen  a  tree  produces  a  flower,  but 
as  we  act ;  namely,  through  an  absolutely  free 
11 


12      Handbook  of  Comparative  Beligio7i. 

and  unfettered  choice,  alike  of  various  ends 
and  of  the  means  to  secure  them. 

Again,  the  God  of  Christianity  is  a  moral 
Being,  loving  righteousness  and  hating  in- 
iquity. Hence  His  choosing  is  never  like  the 
arbitrary  choice  of  a  human  despot,  who 
chooses  and  decrees  whatever  he  will,  often 
through  mere  caprice  and  unjustly.  His 
choices  and  decisions  are  always  determined 
with  reference  to  those  eternal  principles  of 
righteousness,  goodness,  and  truth,  of  which 
His  own  nature  is  the  eternal  and  absolutely 
perfect  expression. 

Again,  in  all  His  attributes  as  such  an  in- 
telligent, moral  Agent,  the  God  of  Christianity 
is  represented  as  ab^utely  without  limjta- 
tions.  As  to  His  Being,  He  is  without  begin- 
ning and  without  end,  and  He  fills  hnmensity 
with  His  presence.  He  is  not  merely  more 
wise,  more  just,  more  good,  more  holy  and 
loving  than  any  other  being,  but  He  is  infi- 
nitely wise,  infinitely  just,  infinitely  good, 
infinitely  holy,  and  infinitely  loving  and 
merciful. 

Hence,  in  consistency  with  all  this,  the  God 
of  Christianity  is  represented  as  Sole,  Unique, 
and  Supreme.  There  is  no  other  like  Him; 
there  is  no  other  associated  with  Him.     In  all 


Doctrine  of  the  World- Religions.         13 

His  boundless  perfections,  He  is  absolutely 
solitary  and  unique. 

But  the  Church  in  all  ages  has  generally 
understood  the  Holy  Scriptures  also  to  teach 
that  in  the  unity  of  the  Godhead  there  is  a 
Trinity  of  Personality.  The  one  and  only 
God,  indivisible  in  His  essence,  exists  neces- 
sarily and  eternally  as  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Spirit.  For  the  Eternal  Love  there  ever  ex- 
isted within  the  unity  of  His  own  Being  and 
Essence,  an  eternal  and  infinitely  worthy 
object  of  that  Love,  revealed  to  us  as  the 
"  well-beloved  Son " ;  and  there  is  also  an 
eternal  holy  fellowship  of  the  Father  and  the 
Son  in  a  Third,  even  the  Holy  Ghost.  And 
yet  though  the  one  God  thus  exists  in  persons 
three,  nevertheless,  according  to  the  belief  of 
the  universal  Church,  the  Three  are  not  three 
Gods,  but  God  is  in  His  essence  One  eternally. 

This  is  not  the  place  to  argue  this  ineffable 
mystery :  our  present  object  is  merely  to  state, 
for  the  purpose  of  comparison  with  other  re- 
ligions Avhat,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  over- 
whelming majority  of  Christians  have  for  cen- 
turies understood  to  be  the  clear  teaching  of 
the  Holy  Scriptures  as  to  the  nature  of  God. 

From  the  conception  of  God  above  set  forth, 
it  follows  that  such  a  Being  must  be  the  Cre- 


14      Handbook  of  Com/parative  Religion, 

ator  and  the  Moral_Goy^rnox..Qf.the  universe. 
If  He  is  the  only  self-existent  One,  and  is  pos- 
sessed with  all  the  attributes  assigned  to  Him, 
then  evidently,  if  anything  else  exists,  it  must 
exist  simply  because  it  is  God's  will  that  it 
should  exist.  And  again,  if  any  creature,  ra- 
tional or  irrational,  act  in  any  way,  this  must 
be  because  God,  according  to  the  nature  of  the 
case,  either  causes  it  to  act,  or,  for  whatsoever 
inscrutable  reason,  allows  it  so  to  act.  In  a 
word,  the  Christian  doctrine  on  this  subject 
is  summed  up  in  the  words  of  the  apostle 
Paul :  "  Of  Him,  and  through  Him,  and  to 
Him  are  all  things."  ^ 

If  we  inquire  more  particularly  as  to  what 
Christianity  teaches  as  to  the  relation  of  God 
to  the  world,  it  is  to  be  answered  that  He  at 
once  transcends^ the  .universe,  and  is  also  im- 
manent therein.  He  transcends  the  universe, 
as  the  phrase  is.  That  is,  in  time  and  in  space 
He  is  before  all,  and  beyond  all,  and  independ- 
ent of  all.  Hence  He  is  by  no  means  to  be 
identified  with  the  universe  of  matter  or  mind, 
as  if  these  were  the  phenomena  of  which  He 
is  the  eternal  substrate.  Before  any  of  these 
were,  He  was. 

But  no  less  is  it  the  doctrine  of  Christianity 

'  Rom.  xi.  36. 


Doctrine  of  the  World- Religions.        15 

that .  God  is  immanent  in  all  things.  This  as- 
pect of  the  relation  of  God  to  the  world, — of 
which  the  perversion  is  pantheism — has  in  ear- 
lier days  been  too  much  overlooked  by  theolo- 
gians, but  in  our  day  is  again  much  insisted  on 
by  Christian  thinkei's,  and  with  abundant  rea- 
son. For  this  is  the  constant  teaching  of  those 
sacred  writings  which  are  the  foundation  of 
Christianity.  Xo  less  than  on  God's  transcend- 
ence to  all,  do  they  also  insist  on  His  imma- 
nence in  all  things.  "  In  Him  we  live,  and 
move,  and  have  our  being ; "  ^  "  in  Him,"  as  the 
eternal  Son,  "  all  things  consist."  ^  The  various 
activities  of  nature  are  constantly  referred  to 
God  in  terms  which,  as  modern  physical  sci- 
ence unmistakably  suggests,  are  not  so  much 
the  language  of  poetry,  as  the  sober  and  accu- 
rate phraseology  of  careful  statement  of  fact. 
But  in  view  of  comparisons  to  be  hereafter 
instituted,  it  is  of  importance  to  notice  here 
that  the  Christian  Scriptures  do  not  allow  us 
to  infer  from  this  immanence  of  God  in  all 
things,  that  He  is  therefore  the  sole  reaLAgent 
in  all  the  various  activitij5S_oi.  man.  While 
spirit,  soul,  and  body  are  all  upheld  in  being 
by  the  incessant  operation  of  His  almighty 
power,  so  that  it  is  true  that  "  in  His  hand  our 

» Acts  xvii.  28.  "Col.  i,  17  (r.  v.). 


16      Handhook  of  Corrvparative  Religion. 

breath  is,  and  His  are  all  our  ways  ; "  ^  yet  when 
a  man  acts,  it  is  he  himself  who  acts,  and  not 
God.  He  acts  moreover  under  no  necessity  of 
external  constraint,  but  in  the  fullest  and 
most  unhindered  exercise  of  that  freedom  of 
personal  choice  without  which  indeed  he  could 
not  be  regarded  as  in  any  true  sense  a  respon- 
sible moral  agent. 

Such,  then,  in  brief,  is  the  teaching  of  Chris- 
tianity as  to  the  being  and  nature  of  God,  and 
His  relation  to  the  universe  of  matter  and  spirit 
which  He  has  made. 

^N^earest  of  kin  to  Christianity  among  the 
ethnic  religions,  is  ^Johammed^jsai.  Most 
strenuously,  as  all  know,  Islam  insists  on  the 
spirituality,  unity,  and  personality,  of  God. 
"  There  is  no  God  but  God,"  is  the  keynote  of 
the  theology  of  Islam.  Yet  even  here  we  are 
met  by  a  difference  from  Christianit}"  most 
profound  and  far-reaching.  For  when  the  Mo- 
hammedan affirms  witli  such  energy  the  unity 
of  God,  he  means  thereby  not  merely  to  deny 
all  polytheism,  but  also  the  doctrine  of  the 
trinity  of  persons  in  the  unity  of  the  Godhead, 
as  held  by  the  immense  majority  of  Christian 
people.  Those  who  have  labored  among  Mo- 
hammedans will  agree  that  when  the  Moham- 

'  Dan.  V.  23. 


Doctrine  of  the  World- Religions,        17 

medan  so  insists  on  the  unity  of  God,  he  has 
indeed  in  mind  above  all  else,  the  Christian 
doctrine  of  the  Holy  Trinity.  To  affirm  this, 
he  declares,  is  to  be  guilty  of  the  damnable  sin 
of  "^AiV^"/  i.  e.^  of  affirming  that  God  has  a 
''  shar\k  "  or  associate ;  no  less  than  if  one  af- 
firmed the  existence  of  the  many  gods  of  the 
polytheist. 

Again,  while  Islam  affirms,  in  opposition  to 
pantheism,  that  God  is  a  personal  Being,  it  yet 
so  represents — or  rather,  misrepresents — this 
truth,  that  the  idea  of  personality  is  caricatured. 
For  while  it  is  true  that  personality  is  centered 
in  will,  and  implies  the  perfect  moral  freedom 
of  the  agent ;  yet  the  highest  possible  concep- 
tion of  personality  does  not  imply  a  power  to 
will  arbitrarily,  without  reference  to  the  na- 
ture of  the  person  willing,  or  to  reasons  be- 
lieved by  him  to  be  good  and  sufficient  for 
willing  as  he  does.  Hence,  while  Christian 
theology  attributes  to  God  the  power  of  free 
self-determination,  it  is  ever  careful  to  explain 
that  this  self-determination  is  not  arbitrary, 
but  that,  on  the  contrary,  God  in  all  His  choos- 
ing is  determined  by  the  highest  reason  and 
righteousness,  and  the  most  perfect  goodness 
and  love.v  Thus  while  the  Holy  Scriptures  un- 
mistakably teach  that  in  the  life  to  come  God 


18      Handbook  of  Contparative  Ileligwn. 

will  punish  many  of  the  human  race  with  ex- 
treme severity,  yet  they  never  represent  this  as 
proceeding  from  arbitrary  caprice,  but  always 
as  based  on  a  moral  reason ;  namely,  tlie  free 
choice  by  such  men  of  sin,  and  their  incorrigi- 
ble persistence  in  rebellion  against  the  infinite 
Love. 

In  contrast  with  this,  one  of  the  most  emi- 
nent and  enlightened  Mohammedan  doctors  of 
our  day,  regarding  this  matter  has  used  the 
following  startling  language :  "  It  is  the  pre- 
rogative of  God,  if  He  please,  without  repent- 
ance, to  pardon  all  sins,  except  that  of  shirk; 
or  again,  if  He  please,  to  visit  His  wrath  upon 
the  very  smallest  of  all  transgressions."  ^  In 
this  we  have  self-determination  no  doubt,  and 
therefore  personality,  but  a  Avill  which  is  freed 
from  the  control  of  all  considerations  of  rea- 
son and  righteousness.^ 

The  contrast  between  Mohammedan  and 
Christian  teaching  regarding  God,  comes  out 
still  more  impressively  when  Ave  consider  the 
question  of  the  divine  attributes.  Both  alike  in- 
sist indeed  on  the  infinite  wisdom,  power,  and 

'Sir  Sayart  Ahmad  Kliaii,  in  the  Introduction  to  his  Commen- 
tary on  the  Booli  of  (ienesis. 

'  Compare  the  words  of  Kuenen :  "  It  was  not  In  tlie  God  of  the 
Mutazilite,  wliose  essence  was  rigliteousness,  but  in  llie  God  of 
Orthodoxy,  the  Almifility.  subject  to  no  other  rule  than  His  own 
caprice,  tliat  tliey  recognized  their  own  and  Mohammed's  AUaii." 
Hibbert  Lectures.  1882,  p.  49. 


Doctrine  of  the  World- Religions.         19 

goodness  of  God,  but  they  stand  in  profound 
contrast  regarding  tlie  relation  and  proportion 
of  His  attributes.  In  the  foreground  of  the 
Mohammedan  system,  beyond  question,  stands 
the  almiffhtiness_jpf  God.  In  the  front  of  the 
Christian  system  of  doctrine  stands  the  infinite 
love  of  God.  "  God  is  love  "  is  an  apostolic 
summary  of  theology.  Yet,  according  to  the 
gospel,  neither  the  power  nor  the  love  is 
ever  exercised  capriciously.  When  God  puts 
forth  His  almighty  power,  this  is  ever  to  carry 
out  the  purposes  of  His  infinite  righteousness 
and  love.  In  like  manner,  when  God  displays 
His  love,  it  is  ever  in  full  accord  with  right- 
eousness, and  under  the  limitations  imposed  by 
the  fact  that  He  is  as  righteous  as  He  is  lov- 
ing, and  as  holy  as  He  is  kind.  Consequently, 
when  He  pardons.  He  pardons  righteously,  no 
less  than  when  He  condemns ;  and  is  declared 
to  be  "  just "  even  when  He  "  justifies  the  un- 
godly." ^  And  although  He  is  infinite  in  love 
and  compassion,  so  that  to  save  the  guilty  He 
is  said  to  have  given  His  only  begotten  Son ;  - 
yet  when  men,  in  the  unfettered  exercise  of 
their  power  of  free  choice,  persist  in  impeni- 
tence and  rebellion,  they  are  not  by  the  love  of 
God,  exercised  in  a  way  of  weak  and  unholy 

» Rom.  iii.  26.  '  John  iii.  16. 


20      Handhook  of  Com^parative  Religion. 

indulgence,  saved  from  the  just  consequences 
and  heavy  penalties  of  their  sin.  Yet  in  it 
all,  the  Christian  revelation  ever  holds  forth 
God  as  the  God  of  holy  and  infinite  love.  The 
keynote  of  both  the  Old  and  the  New  Testa- 
ments is  that  which  Ave  hear  in  the  words  of 
the  prophet  Ezekiel :  "  As  I  live,  saith  the 
Lord  God,  I  have  no  pleasure  in  the  death  of 
the  wicked.  .  .  .  Turn  ye,  turn  ye  from 
your  evil  ways  ;  for  why  will  ye  die  ?  "  ^ 

Most  impressive  and  most  sad  is  the  con- 
trast herein  with  the  character  of  God  as  pre- 
sented in  the  Quran  and  the  Hadis.'^  It  is 
quite  true  that  here  and  there  in  the  Quran 
we  find  representations  of  God  which  so  far  as 
they  go,  are  true  in  thought  and  sublime  in 
expression.  A  Christian  can  well  join  in  the 
ascription  of  praise  which  we  find  in  Sura  1 : 

"  Praise  be  to  God,  Lord  otall  the  worlds, 
The  Compassionate,  the  Merciful, 
King  ou  the  Day  of  reckoning  ! 
Thee  only  do  we  worship,  and  to  Thee  do  we  cry  for  help.*" 

But  although  God  is  continually  praised  as 
^'  the  Most  Merciful,"  His  mercy  is  not  thought 
of  as  springing  from  His  nature  as  eternal 

» Ezek.  xxxiii.  11. 

*The  autliorized  Mohammedan  Tradition. 

^  See  also  a  number  of  passages  brou^lit  topetlier  by  Mr.  Bos- 
worth  Sniitli  in  his  Mohammed  and  Mohammedanism,  pp.  179-181. 


Doctrine  of  the  World- Religions.        21 

Love,  but  as  exercised  in  the  most  arbitrary 
caprice.  The  one  attribute  which  in  the  Quran 
and  all  Mohammedan  writings  is  ever  placed 
in  the  foreground,  is  not  God's  love,  but  His 
power.  The  names  of  God  are  reckoned  at 
ninety  and  nine,  but  the  name  "  Father  "  is  not 
among  them.  Sir  William  Muir  has  rightly 
said :  *'  We  may  search  the  Quran  in  vain  from 
beoinning  to  end  for  any  such  declaration  as 
thH  '  The  Lord  is  not  willing  that  any  should 
perish,'  or  'Who  will  have  all  men  to  be 
saved.' "  '  On  the  contrary,  again  and  again 
God  is  represented  as  misleading  men  and 
causing  them  to  believe  error. 

Kor  is  this  to  be  understood  as  merely 
meaning,  as  in  the  Christian  Scriptures,  that 
He  abandons  the  incorrigible  to  their  self -chosen 
ways  of  sin  and  error.  Gn  the  contrary,  God 
is  represented  as  saying  that  He  actually  cre- 
ated those  who  are  damned  in  order  that  hell 
might  be  full.  Thus,  e.  g.,  we  read :  "  li  thy 
Lord  pleased,  He  had  made  all  men  of  one  re- 
lio-ion;  .  .  .  but  unto  this  hath  He  created 
them;  for  the  word  of  thy  Lord  shall  be  ful- 
filled ;  Verily,  I  will  fill  hell  altogether  with 
genii  and  men."'     And  so  again:  '*We  cre- 

'  The  Covan.  its  Composition  and  Teaching,  p.  56. 
"  Sura  xl.  119. 


22      Ilandhook  of  Cotnparative  Religion. 

ated  man  of  a  most  excellent  fabric;  after- 
ward we  rendered  him  the  vilest  of  the  vile,"  ' 

Again,  the  God  of  the  Quran  is  not  a  holy 
God.  The  word  qiiddus,  meaning  ''  holy,"  is 
indeed  used  of  God  ;  but  practically  one  rarely 
hears  the  word  applied  to  Him.  The  Eev.  S. 
M.  Zwemer,  missionary  to  the  Mohammedans 
at  Busrah,  rightly  says  that  in  the  Quran  the 
word  quddus  "  nowhere  occurs  in  its  biblical 
sense  of  '  pure  in  heart,'  '  separate  from  sin.' 
God  is  called  once  or  twice  '  the  holy  King,' 
but  the  reference  is  more  to  His  glory  and 
majesty  than  to  His  holiness."  That  which 
the  same  authority  says  of  the  Arabs,  is  true 
also  of  the  Mohammedans  of  India:  "The 
very  word  '  holy  '  is  an  unusual,  often  an  unin- 
telligible one  to  the  Arabs  about  the  Persian 
Gulf.  It  is  the  name  least  frequently  given  to 
Allah  among  all  the  ninety  and  nine  beautiful 
names  they  number  on  the  rosary  of  Islam." 

Xot  to  enlarge  further,  we  may  thus  say 
without  hesitation  that  the  representation  of 
the  character  and  nature  of  God  which  is 
found  in  the  Quran,  and  that  which  is  given  in 
the  Christian  Scriptures,  are,  in  matters  the 
most  vital,  diametrically  opposed  the  one  to 

'  Sura  xcv.  4,  5.  See  also.  The  Coran,  bv  Sir  William  Mufr,  p. 
52,  footnote  t,  where  is  given  a  list  of  twenty-two  texts  of  tbe 
Quran  to  the  same  effect. 


Doctrine  of  ih*'   World-Beligions.         23 

the  other.  In  name,  the  God  of  Mohammed 
is  the  God  of  Abraham,  of  the  prophets,  and 
of  the  Lord  Jesus ;  but  in  fact,  He  is  repre- 
sented as  a  Being  of  a  very  different  char- 
acter. 

Hindooism,  whether  ancient  or  modern, 
teaches  a  doctrine  concerning  God,  which 
offers  the  greatest  contrast  to  both  that  of  Chris- 
tianity and  of  Islam.  It  is  however  difficult 
to  state  with  any  brevity  the  teaching  of 
Hindooism  concerning  God,  for  the  reason 
that  the  "  Six  Systems  "  of  philosophy  which 
are  regarded  as  authoritative  among  all  ortho- 
dox Hindoos,  differ  radically  among  them- 
selves as  to  this  very  question  of  a  God.  But 
no_one  of  all  these  systems  teaches  the  exist- 
ence of  a  God  who  is  personal.  Two  of  them, 
indeed,  acknowledge  no  Supreme  Euler,  and, 
like  Buddhism,  make  the  abstraction  of 
hirmma  or  "  deeds "  to  be  in  effect,  the  su- 
preme power  to  which  all  things  are  due.  But 
leaving  the  teachings  of  the  Hindoo  Scriptures 
and  dealing  with  the  actual  beliefs  accepted  by 
the  mass  of  the  Hindoos  to-day,  Ave  may  safely 
say  that  all  their  belief  and  thinking  regarding 
the  being  and  nature  of  God  are  determined  by 
the  pantheism  o"^  the  Yedantic  system  of  philos- 


24      Handbook  of  Comparative  Religion, 

ophy.  Thus  every  Hindoo,  howsoever  many 
gods  and  goddesses  he  may  acknowledge  and 
worship,  will  none  the  less  steadfastly  main- 
tain that  God  is  one  and  one  only.  The  for- 
mula which  represents  their  faith  is  found  in  the 
words,  "  eka7nhrahmam  dvitiyandsti :  Brahma 
is  one  and  there  is  no  second."  But  these 
words,  which  in  sound  so  perfectly  agree  with 
Christian  teaching,  in  reality  have  in  the  mind 
of  the  Hindoo  a  very  different  meaning.  For 
by  this  formula  it  is  intended,  not  that  besides 
Brahma  there  is  no  second  God,  but  that  be- 
sides Him, — or  It — there  is  no_seconxlj'eal  ex- 
istence whatsoever.  In  other  words,  the  God 
of  the  Hindoos  is  not  a  personal  Being.  This 
is  indeed  indicated  by  the  fact  that  in  the 
above  and  similar  Sanskrit  expressions  the 
word  for  "  God  "  is  neuter. 

As  regards  the  attributes  of  God,  it  is  one 
of  the  commonplaces  of  Hindooism  that 
Brahma  exists  in  a  twofold  form ;  viz,  nirgun, 
and  sagu7i,  lit.  "  witli  bonds,"  and  "  without 
bonds."  In  other  words  He  is  to  be  thought 
of  either  as  with,  or  as  without,  attributes ;  or, 
more  precisely,  in  our  modern  philosophical 
terminology,  as  "  unconditioned,"  or  as  "  con- 
ditioned." In  His  essential  ultimate  nature 
He  is  "  unconditioned  "  ;  as  manifested  in  the 


Doctrin<i  of  the  World- Betigiona.         25 

universe  of  mind  and  matter  He  is  "condi- 
tioned." As  nirgtm,  He  is  declared  to  be 
an  "  invisible,  imperceptible,  formless,  infinite, 
and  immutable  Essence,"  which  not  only  was, 
and  is,  and  ever  shall  be,  but  besides  which 
nothing  else  ever  really  was,  or  is,  or  can  be. 
This  is  not  merely  the  doctrine  of  learned 
Sanskrit  works,  of  which  the  masses  know 
nothing,  but  is  the  teaching  of  the  most  popu- 
lar of  North  India  poets,  Tulsi  Das,  who  says, 
in  the  Bal  Kand  of  his  Eamayan,  "  Both  un- 
conditioned and  conditioned  is  Ram's  essential 
nature;"  "Ineffable,  incomprehensible,  with- 
out beginning,  and  without  his  like." 

Hence,  while  the  God  of  Christianity  is  a 
personal  Being,  eternally  and  necessarily  self- 
conscious  and  self-determining,  the  God  of  the 
Hindoos  is  not  a  personal  Being,  nor  is  he  es- 
sentially distinct  either  from  man  or  from  the 
universe.  This,  again,  is  not  merely  the  doc- 
trine held  by  the  learned  and  educated  few, 
but  is  the  belief  of  the  people  generally.  Even 
from  ignorant  coolies  who  cannot  read,  I  have 
often  heard  the  words.  Ham  nsl  he  ansh 
hain,  "We  are  parts  of  That  One ; "  or,  again, 
Jo  loltd  hai,  so  loahl  hai,  "  He  who  speaks  is 
That  One ; "  that  is,  whenever  I  speak,  that  in 
me  which  speaks  is  God.     Or,  again,  they  will 


2(^      Handbook  of  Comparative  Religion. 

say,    Kartta    waM    hai^    "  That    One    is    the 
Agent." 

Some  have  fancied,  however,  that  there  was 
at  least  a  real  and  ver^^  suggestive  analogy  be- 
tween the  Hindoo  and  the  Christian  concep- 
tion of  God,  in  the  Hindoo  doctrine  of  the  Di- 
vine Triad,  Brahma,  Yishnu,  and  Shiva,  the 
Creator,  Preserver,  and  Destroyer,  who  are 
each  the  one  God.  But  the  analogy  is  super- 
ficial and  utterly  misleading.  For  the  Chris- 
tian teaching  represents  the  threeness  in  the 
one  essence  of  the  Godhead  to  be  a  threeness 
of  persons ;  such  that  the  Father  and  the  Son 
can  reciprocally  address  each  other  as  "  Thou," 
etc.,  etc.  But  Brahma,  Yishnu,  and  Shiva  are 
not  regarded  as  three  distinct  persons,  but  as 
ideally  three  manifestations  of  the  One  Being, 
which — in  another  than  the  Christian  sense — 
is  all  and  in  all.  Brahma  is  That  One,  con- 
ceived as  originating  new  manifestations  of  be- 
ing ;  Yishnu,  as  maintaining  these  manifesta- 
tions ;  Shiva,  as  bringing  them  to  an  end ; 
and,  indeed,  as  these  three  are  one,  so  their 
work  also,  from  the  Hindoo  point  of  view,  is 
one.  For  it  is  argued :  There  is  no  creating  of 
something  new  which  does  not  involve  the 
bringing  to  an  end  of  that  thing  or  condition 
which   existed   before   it ;   hence,   the   act   of 


Doctrine  of  the  World-IteligioiUi.         27 

origination  and  of  destroying  are  really  one 
and  inseparable ;  and,  again,  what  is  preserva- 
tion but  a  continued  creation  ? 

It  follows  from  this  popular  conception  of 
God  that  when  a  Hindoo  assents  to  the  Chris- 
tian affirmation  of  certain  attributes  as  belong- 
ing to  the  Supreme  Being,  he  does  not  mean 
what  the  Christian  means.  He  will  readily 
admit  that  God  is  all-powerful,  but  meaning 
that  all_pg\yer  is  really  His  power,  and  that  we 
cannot  set  limits  to  that  power ;  that  He  is  om- 
niscient, inasmuch  as  all  knowing  is  His  know- 
ing; omnipresent — or  rather,  all-pervasive; 
but  only  because  all  that  is,  is  His  very  essence. 
He  will  admit  that  God  is  holy,  but  explains 
this  in  such  a  way  that  it  is  clear  at  once  that 
he  does  not  mean  by  tliis  what  the  Christian 
means ;  but  only  that  all  holiness  is  of  God  in 
the  same  pantheistic  sense  and  manner  in 
which  also  all  unholy  actions  are,  no  less  truly, 
the  acts  of  that  one  only  Agent.  Hence,  it  is 
extremely  difficult  to  make  the  ordinary 
Hindoo  feel  that  there  is  anything  in,  for  in- 
stance, the  unspeakable  licentiousness  imputed 
to  Krishna,  or  the  awful  blood thirstiness  at- 
tributed to  Shiva  or  Kali,  which  is  inconsistent 
with  the  supposition  that  each  of  these  is  trulv 
Divine,  and  to  be  worshiped  as  such.     It  is 


28      Ilandbook  of  Comparative  Religion. 

quite  true  that  an  ineradicable  instinct  of  social 
self-preservation  has  led  Hindoo  writers  to 
teach  that  in  acts  of  such  a  character  their  sup- 
posed deities  are  not  to  be  imitated  bv  us;  a 
counsel  logically  incU^feiisible  and  not  always 
observed ;  but  it  is  only  too  generally  believed 
that  their  favorite  poet,  Tulsi  Das,  was  quite 
right  in  his  constantly  quoted  dictum :  ''  To  the 
mighty,  O  Gusain,  is  no  sin."  ^ 

From  all  this  it  is  evident  that  Hindoo  poly- 
theism is  not  inconsistent  with  the  universal 
insistence  of  the  Hindoos  on  the  unity  of  God, 
as  they  understand  that  unity ;  but  is  instead 
securely  grounded  on  it.  If  everything — 
whatever  else  by  renson  of  ignorance  it  may 
appear  to  me  to  be — is  realh^  God,  then  it  is 
assuredly  right  to  regard  and  worship  any- 
thing as  God.  Whether  it  be  the  intellectual 
Krishna  of  the  Bhagavad  Gita,  or  the  licen- 
tious Krishna  of  the  Prem  Sagar ;  Avhether  the 
glorious  sun  or  the — very  common — obscene 
symbol  of  the  ling  or  united  ling  and  yoni^ 
each  is  Divine,  and  lie  who  likes  may  worship 
either  without  blame.     Even  so,  the  evil  char- 


»This  Js  not  merely  an  unpractical  speculation.  In  the  speech 
made  in  1897  at  Poona  by  the  Hon.  Mr.  Gangadhar  Tilak,  which 
was  tlie  occasion  of  his  nnest,  trial,  and  imiirisonment  on  the 
charge  of  inciting  to  rebellion  against  the  British  Government  of 
India,  he  justified  the  Maliratta  hero,  Sliiva  Jee,  in  Mie  assassina- 
tion of  the  then  Mohammedan  ruler,  expressly  on  tins  ground. 


Doctrine  of  the  World- Religions,        29 

acter  of  many  of  their  supposed  incarnations 
is  not  inconsistent  with  Hindoo  belief  as  to  the 
attributes  of  God,  but  is  evidently  in  full  ac- 
cord therewith. 

It  only  remains  to  be  added  that  this  teach- 
ing of  Hindooism  as  to  the  being  and  nature 
of  God,  logically  involves  what  tlie  Hindoos 
commonly  believe  as  to  the  relation  of  God  to 
the  world.  All  Hindoos  agree  that  God  is  the 
Creator  of  the  Avorld ;  but,  again,  they  mean 
not  by  this  what  the  Christian  means  by  such 
words.  That  God  created  the  world  out  of 
nothing,  according  to  Hindooism,  is  not  for  a 
moment  to  be  believed.  The  Sanskrit  maxim 
is  regarded  as  expressing  axiomatic  truth : — 
ndvastuno  vastiisiddhih,  "  out  of  nothing  noth- 
ino-  can  come."  Christianitv  teaches  that  God 
is  the  efficient  cause  of  the  world ;  Hindooism, 
that  He  is  the  material  cause.  That  is.  He  is 
the  cause  of  the  existence  of  the  world  in  the 
sense  in  which  the  clay  is  the  cause  of  the  ex- 
istence of  the  pot  which  is  made  of  it.  Or,  to 
use  their  own  favorite  illustration :  H  I  go 
into  a  dark  room  and  see  a  rope  which  I  mis- 
take for  a  snake,  the  rope  is  the  cause  of  the 
appearance  of  that  snake ;  even  so,  when  I  see 
the  world,  which  seems  to  every  one  to  be 
other  than  God,  yet  is  really  That  One,  I  must 


30       Ilamlhook  of  Comparntlce   Religion, 

say  that  God  is  the  cause  of  what  appears  to 
me  to  be  a  world. 

Also,  as  according  to  the  Hindoo  concep- 
tion, God  is  not,  in  the  Christian  sense,  the 
Creator  of  the  world,  so  neither  is  He  to  be 
thought  of  as  in  any  true  sense  its  Moral  Gov- 
ernor. For  it  is  evident  that  the  everyday 
phrase  among  the  Hindoos,  Karttd  icaM  hai 
^'  He  himself  is  the  Agent " — i.  e.,  in  all  man's 
seemingly  free  actions — excludes  the  idea  of  a 
moral  government  of  the  world  by  God.  Hin- 
dooism  indeed  admits  that  there  is  a  necessary 
and  inevitable  sequence  between  our  acts  and 
their  reward  or  retribution  ;  but  tliis  is  not  be- 
cause of  any  moral  government  of  the  w^orld 
by  God,  as  we  understand  it ;  but  only  because 
of  an  inherent  and  necessary,  but  non-moral, 
nexus  between  harmma  and  joArtZ,  "  works " 
and  "fruit."  And  indeed  if  the  personality 
of  God  be  denied,  where  is  there  left  any  place 
for  the  conception  of  His  moral  government  ? 

Such  in  merest  outline  is  the  teaching  of 
Hindooism  as  to  the  being  and  nature  of  God. 
If  there  be  at  first  sight  not  a  few  points  of 
apparent  similarity  to  Christian  doctrine,  yet 
a  very  little  examination  shows  that  the  simi- 
larity is  chiefly  apparent,  and  that  the  contra- 
dictions between  the  teaching  of  the  two  sys- 


Doctrine  of  the  World- Religions.         31 

tems  as  to  this  most  fundamental  question,  far 
outweigh  any  real  agreements. 

Buddhism  in  recent  years  has  been  much 
lauded  by  many  as  a  religion  which,  more  than 
any  other,  agrees  with  Christianity.  We  have 
been  told  that  Buddha,  no  less  than  Jesus 
Christ,  taught  the  existence  of  a  personal  God. 
Mr.  James  Freeman  Clarke  has  told  his  readers 
that  the  object  of  the  life  of  Sakya  Muni  "  was 
to  attain  nirvana^  ...  a  union  with  God, 
the  Infinite  Being." '  Mr.  Ernest  de  Bunsen 
has  gone  even  further  and  declares  that  the 
doctrine  of  Gautama  Buddha  "  centered  in  the 
belief  in  a  personal  God."^  But  over  against 
such  assertions  we  may  place  the  well-nigh 
unanimous  declarations  of  the  most  eminent 
specialists  in  the  study  of  Buddhism.  Koppen 
declares  categorically  that  Buddhism  knows  of 
"  no  God,  .  .  .  as  to  be  supposed  anteced- 
ent to  the  world.  .  .  .  There  is  only  an 
eternal  BecomimL  no  eternal  Being. ''^  ^  Olden- 
berg,  who  perhaps  may  be  regarded  as  facile 
jprinceps  among  modern  investigators  of  Bud- 
dhism, says  that  the  Buddhists  maintain  ''  caus- 
ality Avithout  substance."     "  Where  there  is  no 

•  Tc'.n  Great  Religions,  p.  168. 

''The  Angel  Messiah,  of  Buddhists,  Essenes,  and  Christians. 
p.  48. 
^Die  Religion  des  Buddha,  1  Bd.  S.  230, 


32     Handbook  of  Comparative  Religion. 

Being,  but  only  a  coming  to  pass,  there  can  be 
recognized  as  the  First  and  the  Last,  not  a 
substance,  but  only  a  law."  ^  No  less  categor- 
ically Professor  Max  Mllller  says  that  Buddha 
denies  the  existence,  "not  only  of  a  Creator 
but  of  any  absolute  Being  ;  "  ^  and  that  as  re- 
gards "  the  idea  of  a  personal  Creator  .  .  . 
Buddha  seems  merciless."^  A  few  citations 
from  the  canonical  Buddhist  Scriptures  will 
show  with  what  good  reason  such  scholars 
have  so  spoken.  In  the  Vinaya  Text  of  the 
Pdrdjika,  the  Buddha  is  represented  as  say- 
ing, "  I  do  not  see  any  one  in  the  heavenly 
worlds,  nor  in  that  of  Mara,  nor  among  the 
inhabitants  of  the  Brahma  worlds,  nor  among 
gods  or  men,  whom  it  would  be  proper  for 
me  to  honor."  In  the  Salla  Sutta  of  the 
Sutta  Nipdta  the  Buddha  declares,  ''  With- 
out a  cause  and  unknown  is  the  life  of  mor- 
tals in  this  world."  Similar  statements  and 
intimations  are  so  numerous,  and  the  utter 
absence  of  anything  contradictory  of  them  is 
so  conspicuous,  that  it  is  no  wonder  that  the 
leading  Buddhistic  scholars  of  our  day  are 
practically  unanimous  as  to  this  point  of  Bud- 
dhist doctrine ;  and  such  assertions  to  the  con- 

»  Buddha,  sein  Leben,  seine  Lehre,  seine  Gemeinde,  S.  257,  258. 
■^  Chips  from  a  German  Workshop,  vol.  i.  p.  227. 
^  Buadhaghosha's  Parables,  lutrutluction,  p.  x.\xi. 


Doct^nne  of  the  World- Religions.        33 

traiy  as  are  above  cited,  are  evidently  based 
on  an   astonishing  misapprehension  or  igno- 
rance of  the  facts.     With  the  statements  of 
European  students   of   the   Sacred  Books   of 
Buddhism,  agrees  the  unanimous  testimony  of 
inissiaiiaxLes  in  Buddhist  lands  who,  as  living 
in  daily  contact  with  the  people,  are  of  all 
others  best  qualified  to  tell  us  what  is  under- 
stood by  the  votaries  of  Buddhism  to  be  its 
teaching.     Mr.  Hardy,  who  was  many  years  a 
missionary  in  Ceylon,  says  that  while  there 
are  here  an4  there  individual  Buddhists,  more 
particularly  among  those  who  have  come  under 
Christian  influence,  who  believe  in  the  exist- 
ence of  a  God,  yet  these  are  exceptions;  and 
"the  missionaries  are  frequently  told  that  our 
religion  Avould  be  an  excellent  one,  if  we  could 
leave  out  of  it  all  that  is  said  about  a  Creator."  ^ 
Dr.  Edkins,  some  time  missionary  to  China, 
says :     "  Atheism  is  one  point  in  the  faith  of 
the  southern  Buddhists:     .     .     .     the  Chinese 
Buddhists  do  not  hold  that  one  Supreme  Spirit 
rules  over  the   whole  collection  of  worlds."^ 
To  the  same  effect  might  be  cited  the  testi- 
mony of  Dr.  Adoniram  Judson,  missionary  to 
Burmah,  and  many  othei^.     I  will  add  only 

'  Legends  and  Theories  of  the  mtddhtsts,  p.  221. 
'  Chinese  Bitddhism,  p.  191. 


34      Handhook  of  Comparative  Religion. 

that  in  India,  the  birthplace  of  Buddhism, 
Buddhism  is  universally  understood  by  the 
people  to  be  distinguished  from  Brahmanical 
Hindooism  as  being  atheistic.  The  Brahmans 
constantly  use  the  phrases  Bauddha  mat^  "  the 
Buddhist  doctrine,"  as  equivalent  to  Ndstik 
mat^  lit.  ''  the  Ile-is-not  doctrine ;  L  e.^  the  doc- 
trine which  declares  that  He — namely,  God — 
is  not.^ 

Confucius  probably  could  not  fairly  be  called 
an  atheist,  but  he  avoids,  to  a  great  extent,  re- 
ferring to  any  Supreme  Being.  He  frequently 
refers  to  the  ordinances  of  "  Heaven,"  but  in 
a  way  which  leaves  it  uncertain  whether  he 
thought  of  the  power  thus  named  as  a  personal 
God.  In  fact,  Confucianism  deals  so  exclu- 
sively with  the  affairs  of  earth,  and  the  duties 
between  man  and  man,  that  it  may  well  be 
questioned  whether  it  can  fairly  be  called  a 
religion,  or  anything  more  than  a  system  of 
social  ethics.  All  agree  that  in  extreme  an- 
tiquity, the  Chinese  recognized  the  existence 
of  a  Supreme  God,  known  as  Shang  Te.  Pro- 
fessor Douglas  says  that  then  "  in  the  eyes  of 
the  emperor  and  people,  Shang  Te  appeared 

'  For  a  much  more  complete  discussion  of  tills  and  other  points 
nt  Buddhist  doctrine,  I  mav  be  permitted  to  refer  the  reader  to 
my  Light  of  Asia  and  the  Light  of  the  World.  Macmillan  &  Co., 
London  and  New  Vorli, 


Doctrine  of  the  World- Religions.        35 

as  a  personal  God,  directing  their  ways,  sup- 
porting them  in  their  difficulties,  and  chastis- 
ing them  for  their  faults.  .  .  .  But  as  time 
went  on,  the  distinctive  belief  in  the  person- 
ality of  Shang  Te  became  obscured,  and  he  was 
degraded  from  his  supremacy  to  the  level  of 
the  impersonal  Ileayen."  '  From  this  national 
degradation  of  belief,  Confucius  did  not  es- 
cape. He  is  said  never  to  mention  this  Shang 
Te,  nor  enjoin  his  worship,  although  he  does 
sanction  the  worship  of  spirits  and  also  of 
one's  ancestors.  It  is  therefore  only  in  a  very 
qualified  sense,  if  at  all,  that  we  can  speak  of 
Confucianism  as  a  theistic  religion. 

Kot  much  better  can  be  said  of  the  Chinese 
Taouism.  What  indeed  were  the  real  teach- 
ings of  its  founder,  Laou  Tsze,  with  reference 
to  God,  has  been — and  probably  always  will 
be — greatly  disputed.  On  the  whole,  however, 
the  opinion  seems  probable  that,  although  in 
veiled  and  obscure  language,  Laou  Tsze  meant 
to  teach  the  existence  of  a  Supreme  Being. 
But  certainly,  if  this  was  his  intention,  he  must 
be  understood  in  a  pantheistic  sense :  for,  as 
Professor  Douglas  tells  us,  he  taught  that  it 
vras  possible  for  the  creature  to  be  absorbed 
into  the  Creator.^     But  whatever  may  have 

'  Confucianism  and  Taouism,  p.  83.       *  See  Ibid.  pp.  211,  212. 


36      Handbook  of  Comparative  Religion. 

been  his  precise  belief,  bis  modern  disciples 
have  practically  lost  sight  of  the  Supreme  God, 
and  instead  worship  Laou  Tsze  himself,  and 
with  him  also  an  imaginar}^  being,  Yuh-hwang 
Shang  Te — supposed  to  be  the  ruler  of  the  ma- 
terial universe.  In  addition  to  these  are  also 
worshiped  the  heavenly  bodies,  and  the  vari- 
ous powers  of  nature,  together  with  a  multi- 
tude of  imaginar}^  spirits,  who  are  supposed  to 
preside  over  the  various  departments  of  life. 

Passing  over  to  Japan,  in  the  national  Shin- 
toism  we  find  a  religion — if  religion  it  can 
properly  be  called — which  is  thoroughly  j^ha- 
istic.  It  can  hardly  be  better  described  than 
as  a  system  of  fantastic  atheistic  evolution. 
The  "gods"  who  are  worshiped  in  Shintoism 
are  not  the  originators  of  the  world,  but  were 
themselves  evolved  from  it.  But  it  is  needless 
for  our  purpose  to  go  into  further  detail.  In 
a  word,  the  Shinto  doctrine  regarding  God,  is 
that  there  is  no  _such  Being,  and  that  the  so- 
called  gods  appeared  spontaneously,  at  a  cer- 
tain stage  of  the  w^orld's  evolution. 


CHAPTEK  lY. 

THE  DOCTRINE  CONCERNING  SIN. 

As  before  remarked,  all  religions  more  or 
less  distinctly  recognize  and  deal  with  the  fact 
of  man's  consciousness  of  sin.  Even  such  re- 
ligions as  Shintoism  and  Buddhism,  wherein 
is  recognized  no  personal  Creator,  are  no  ex- 
ceptions to  this  rule.  What  sin  really  is  many 
sadly  misunderstand,  but  they  cannot  ignore 
the  fact  that  man  is  not  in  a  spiritually  normal 
condition. 

Nothing  is  more  characteristic  of  the  Chris- 
tian religion  than  the  place  which  sin  holds  in 
its  system  of  teaching.  It  is,  in  a  word,  that 
supreme  evil,  the  root  of  all  other  evil,  to  de- 
liver man  from  which  is  everywhere  repre- 
sented as  the  prime  object  of  Christ  in  coming 
into  the  world.  As  to  the  nature  of  sin,  it  is 
the  Christian  teaching  that  sin  concerns  man's 
relation  to  God.  It  consists  fundamentally  in 
this :  that,  man  is  not  what,  Ike  .holy  law  oi 
God_.rightly  requires  him  to  be,  and  does  not 
do  what  either  the  law  of  nature  or  of  super- 
natural revelation  requires  of  him.  That  re- 
37 


38      Handbook  of  Coinjjarative  Religion. 

quirement  is,  "  Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy 
God  with  all  thy  heart,  .  .  .  [and]  thy 
neighbor  as  thyself/'^  "He  that  loveth  an- 
other hath  fulfilled  the  law."  ^  He  that  lov- 
eth not  thus  God  and  man,  is  a  lawbreaker,  a 
sinner. 

Going  still  more  deeply  into  the  matter,  the 
Christian  Scriptures  teach  that  sin  concerns 
not  only  actions  but  states  and  feelings  as  well ; 
in  a  word,  that  man^s  nature  is  sinful.  He 
did  not  merely,  by  some  unfortunate  accident 
or  unwise  choice  become  a  sinner,  and  thus  the 
object  of  God's  holy  anger,  but  he  is  a  child 
of  wrath  by  nature.^  Nevertheless,  the  Chris- 
tian teaching  insists  that  for  this  God  is  not 
responsible,  but  man.  With  the  utmost  ear- 
nestness the  apostle  James  declares  that  God 
neither  is  nor  can  be  the  author  of  sin.^  The 
trouble  is  with  man,  with  his  perverse  and  re- 
belling will  which  will  insist  on  self-will  as  the 
rule  of  life,  instead  of  God's  will. 

Hence,  Christianity  magnifies  to  the  utmost 
the  guilt  of  sin.  It  declares  that  because  "  the 
invisible  things  of  God  from  the  creation  of 
the  world  are  clearly  seen,  even  His  eternal 
power  and  Godhead,"  therefore  men  are  "  with- 

»  See  Matt.  xxil.  37-39.  and  parallels.  «  Rom.  xlii.  8. 

» Epli.  il.  8.  *  See  James  i.  13, 14. 


The  J  Joe  trine  Concerning  Sin,  30 

out  excuse "  in  that  "  when  they  knew  God 
they  glorified  Him  not  as  God,  neither  were 
thankfuL"  ^  It  further  teaches  that  this  guilt 
of  man  is  such  that  by  no  tears  of  repentance 
nor  any  sacrifice  of_his__awn,  hoAvever  costly, 
can  he  expiate  his  guilt  and  become  reconciled 
to  God.  It  teaches,  moreover,  that  while  sin 
leaves  man's  free  agency  untouched,  so  that 
he  is  fully  responsible  for  his  sin,  yet  it  is  none 
the  less  true  that,  as  Jesus  said,  "  Whosoever 
committeth  sin,  is  the  servant  [slave]  of  sin." ' 
It  is  insisted  that  for  one  who  is  accustomed 
to  do  evil,  to  learn  to  do  well  is  as  possible  as 
for  the  Ethiopian  to  change  his  skin  or  the 
leopard  his  spots.^ 

As  for  the  consequences  of  sin,  Christianity 
is,  again,  most  explicit.  For  man  left  to  his 
own  resources,  there  is  no  escape  from  a  life 
of  unending  sin  and  misery.  While  the  first  be- 
ginnings of  these  evil  issues  are  felt  with  more 
or  less  severity  in  this  present  life,  they  are 
represented  as  culminating  in  the  life  to  come ; 
which  retributions  none  have  described  in 
more  terrible  language  than  He  who  said  that 
He  came  into  the  world  to  save  sinners. 

As  to  the  origin  of  the  sin  and  misery  in 
which  mankind  is  evidently  sunk,  Christianity 

'  Rom.  i.  20,  21.  « John  viii.  34.  *  Jer.  xiil.  23. 


4:0      llatidbook  of  Conqjarative  Religion, 

does  not  attempt  to  explain  the  ultimate  mys- 
tery, further  than  to  teach  that  it  had  its  origin 
in  the  abuse  of  man's  free  agency,  and  that 
the  sin  of  the  first  ancestor  of  the  race  in  this 
respect  involved  the  Avhole  race  in  hereditary 
guilt  and  misery.  "  By  one  man  sin  entered 
into  the  world  and  death  by  sin."  ^ 

Among  modern  non-Christian  religions,  Mo- 
hammedanism, although  widely  differing  from 
Christian  teaching  in  its  doctrine  as  to  sin,  yet 
most  nearly  approaches  it.  As  in  Christianity, 
sin  is  regarded  as  consisting  in  opposition  to 
the  will  of  God.  Sin  has  however  in  the  the- 
ology of  Islam,  a  much  narrower  definition 
than  in  Christianity,  inasmuch  as  only  willful 
violations  of  the  law  of  God  are  reckoned  sin, 
and  sins  of  ignorance  are  not  recognized. 

But  the  Mohammedan  conception  of  sin  is 
further  vitiated  by  a  misapprehension  of  what 
is  involved  in  the  absolute  freedom  of  God. 
Whereas,  according  to  the  Christian  concep- 
tion, God  wills  this  or  that  because  it  is  right, 
namely,  in  accord  with  His  own  infinitely  per- 
fect and  holy  nature,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is 
the  Mohammedan  doctrine  that  a  thing  is  right 
merely  because  God  wills  it.  Consistently,  in 
the  Quran,  God  is  represented  as  ordering  the 

•  Rom.  V.  12, 


Tht  Doctrine   Concerning  Sin.  41 

commission  of  gross  crimes,  forbidden  in  the 
Mosaic  Decalogue,  which  then  become  right 
and  obligatory,  simply  because  God  has  de- 
clared this  to  be  His  will.  Hence  it  is  that, 
very  significantly,  instead  of  the  words  "  guilt " 
and  "  transgression,"  Mohammedan  writers 
prefer  the  terms  "  the  permitted  "  and  "  the 
forbidien."  Hence,  again,  the  distinction  be- 
tween moral  and  ceremonial  precepts  is  almost 
completely  destroyed.  Thus,  Mr.  Palgrave,  in 
his  travels  in  Arabia,  tells  us  that  on  one  oc- 
casion he  asked  a  Wahabi  Mohammedan  what, 
in  iiis  opinion,  was  the  greatest  of  sins.  "  Un- 
doubtedly," he  replied,  "  the  sin  of  shirks ' 
And  what  the  second  ?  "  Undoubtedly,  the 
use  of  tobacco."  And  how  about  murder,  ly- 
ing, and  adultery  ?  ''  Ah  !  God  is  merciful  f " 
was  the  reply. 

Again,  sin,  according  to  the  Mohammedan 
doctrine,  has  nothing  to  do  with  our  nature. 
It  is  denied  that  the  nature  of  man  has  any 
evil  taint.  It  is  believed  tliat  human  sin  be- 
gan with  the  fall  of  Adam,  as  related  in  Gene- 
sis ;  but  man  inherits  from  him  nothing  of  the 
nature  of  moral  evil.  Yet  the  Quran  admits 
the  universal  sinfulness  of  man,  though  little 
is  said  of  it.     Thus :  "  If  God  should  punish 

'That  is,  denying  the  personal  unity  of  the  Godhead. 


42      Handbook  of  Co^nparative  Religion. 

men  for  their  iniquity,  He  would  not  leave 
upon  the  earth  any  moving  thing."  ^  Why  sin 
should  be  thus  universal,  if  there  be  no  taint 
of  nature,  and  each  man  sins  independently,  is 
a  question  which  Mohammedanism  leaves  un- 
noticed. 

As  to  the  consequences  of  sin,  in  this  life  and 
the  life  to  come,  Mohammed  depicted  these  in 
the  most  terrible  language.  "  The  wicked 
shall  be  cast  into  scorching  fire  to  be  broiled ; 
they  shall  be  given  to  drink  of  a  boiling  foun- 
tain ;  they  shall  have  no  food,  but  of  dry 
thorns  and  thistles.'"^  But  the  sufferings  of 
the  wicked  are  not  represented,  as  in  the  Bible, 
as  the  necessary  moral  consequence  of  sin,  but 
as  due  simply  to  the  arbitrary  will  aad  decree 
of  God,3        '  "zr^  '"-     " 

In  contrast  with  the  teaching  of  the  Chris- 
tian Scriptures,  Mohammed  did  not  recognize 
the  guilt  of  sin  to  be  such  as  to  require  an  ex- 
piation in  order  to  the  Divine  forgiveness. 
The  remission  of  the  penalty  of  sin  is  regarded 
as  wholl}"  within  the  prerogative  of  God,  and 
dependent  soleh"  on  His  sovereign  pleasure, 
wholly  apart  from  any  mediation  or  expiation. 

'Sura  xvi.  63. 
'^Sura  Ixxxviii.  3. 

'  See  also  the  passage  cited  above,  p.  18,  from  the  writings  of 
Sir  Sayad  Alimad  Kliau,  p.  10. 


Tlw  Doctrine   Concerning  Sin.  43 

Evidently,  therefore,  Mohammed  rated  the 
guilt  and  ill-desert  of  sin  much  lower  than  do 
those  religions  in  which  atonement,  in  some 
form  or  other,  is  regarded  as  the  indispensable 
condition  of  pardon ;  and  accordingly,  among 
Mohammedans  everywhere  the  sense  of  the 
guilt  of  sin  is  exceedingly  slight. 

Nothing  has  done  more  to  lessen  the  sense 
of  guilt  among  Mohammedans  than  their  doc- 
trine of  taqdh\  or  the  foi^eordination  of  God. 
According  to  the  general  belief  of  Mohammed- 
ans, everything — even  the  apparently  free  acts 
of  men — has  not  only  been  foreordained  by 
God,  but  the  morally  good  and  the  morally 
evil  have  been  foreordained  in  the  same  sense 
and  in  the  same  manner.  If  this  be  so,  then 
it  is  quite  plain  that  man  is  a  mere  puppet  in 
God's  hands,  and  responsibility  and  ^uilt  there 
cannot  be. 

It  is  indeed  true  that  there  are  some  passages 
in  the  Quran  which  seem  inconsistent  with  the 
extreme  form  in  which  Mohammed  taught  the 
foreordination  of  God.  Thus  men  are  com- 
manded to  pray,  to  believe  the  prophet,  and  to 
do  good  works,  and  salvation  is  often  repre- 
sented as  depending  upon  their  believing  or  re- 
jecting the  doctrine  taught  by  Mohammed. 
We  read,  for  example :    "  The  truth  is  from 


44      Handbook  of  Comjparati/ve  Religion. 

your  Lord ;  wherefore  let  him  who  will  believe ; 
and  let  him  that  will  be  incredulous.  We  have 
surely  prepared  for  the  unjust  hell  fire."  ^ 

But  the  Quran  is  full  of  passages  of  a  very 
different  tone;  Avhich,  as  every  one  knows, 
have  had  the  effect  of  making  the  Mohammed- 
ans everywhere  to  be  the  most  thomugbgoing 
fatalists  to  be  found  in  the  world.  Thus  it  is 
written:  "The  fate  of  every  man  have  we 
bound  about  his  neck."  "God  misleadeth 
whom  He  pleaseth,  and  guideth  whom  He 
pleaseth  aright."  ^ 

If  it  be  asked,  wherein  does  the  doctrine  of 
the  divine  foreordination  as  taught  in  the 
Quran  and  accepted  by  Mohammedans  gen- 
erally, differ  from  the  same  as  taught  in  the 
Christian  Scriptures,  we  may  say  that  the  fun- 
damental difference  lies  in  this ;  that,  accord- 
ing to  the  Scriptures,  while  God  has  predeter- 
mined all  things,  and  while  the  ultimate  rea- 
sons of  His  decrees  are  found  in  Himself,  yet 
inasmuch  as  He  is  not  only  infinite  in  power, 
but  also,  by  the  very  necessity  of  His  nature, 
infinite  in  righteousness  and  love,  therefore  no 
decree  can  be  arbitrary,  but  has  its  reason  in 
the  perfect  righteousness,  love,  and  goodness 
of  God.     Hence  it  follows  that,  according  to 

'Sura  xvlll.  28.  *Sura  xvl.  95  ;  xvii.  14,  et  passim. 


The  Doctrine   Concerning  Sin.  45 

Holy  Scripture,  the  purpose  of  God  is  not  re- 
lated in  the  same  way  to  all  the  free  acts  of 
His  creatures.  He  decrees  that  which  is  go^ 
effectively^  as  its  direct  source  and  origin ;  but 
the  origin  of  evil  is  never  in  the  Scriptures  at- 
tributed to  the  foreordination  of  God,  but  to 
the  abuse  of  f ree_agency  by  His  creatures.  So, 
again,  though  He  have  chosen  some  unto  life 
eternal  in  His  Son,  not  on  the  ground  of  their 
works,  but  solely  out  of  His  free  grace  and 
pit}^ ;  on  the  other  hand  it  is  nowhere  taught 
in  the  Bible,  as  in  the  Quran,  that  God  in  like 
manner  foreordains  some  to  perdition  without 
reference  to  their  works,  creating  them  for  this 
end.  For  while  it  is  taught  that  many  are 
undoubtedly  foreordained  to  perdition,  it  is 
ever  kept  before  us  that  this  is  on  the  ground 
of  their  willful  and  incorrigible  rebellion,  as 
foreseen  by  God.  But  the  Quran,  on  the  con- 
trary, represents  the  Divine  decree  as  related 
in  precisely  the  same  way  to  the  good  and  the 
evil  acts  of  men.  God  decrees,  now  the  salva- 
tion of  this  one,  and  now  the  damnation  of  that 
one,  simply  and  only  because  He  wills  it.  The 
decreeing  of  God  is  wholW  independent  of  any 
considerations  of  either  righteousness,  justice, 
or  love.  The  spirit  of  the  theology  of  Islam 
on  this  point  is  well  represented  in  one  of  the 


3  -L;'- 


40      Ilandhook  of  Comjxtrative  Religion. 

authentic  Mohammedan  traditions,  which  Mr. 
Palgrave  gives  as  often  heard  by  him  from  the 
Wahabees  of  Nejed,  thus : 

'*  When  God  resolved  to  create  the  human 
race,  He  took  into  His  hands  a  mass  of  earth, 
the  same  whence  all  mankind  were  to  be 
formed,  and  in  which  they  in  a  manner  pre- 
existed ;  and  having  then  divided  the  clod  into 
two  equal  portions,  He  threw  the  one  half  into 
hell,  saying.  These  to  eternal  fire,  and  I  care 
not ;  and  projected  the  other  half  into  heaven, 
adding,  And  these  to  Paradise,  and  I  care 
not."  ^ 

Teri^ible  as  the  language  of  the  ^'  Traditions  " 
is,  it  does  not  go  beyond  the  teaching  of  the 
Quran  as  to  the  relation  of  God  to  the  sin  of 
men,  in  such  words  as  these :  "  \i  we  had 
pleased,  we  had  certainly  given  unto  every 
soul  its  direction ;  but  the  word  which  hath 
proceeded  from  me  must  necessarily  be  ful- 
filled when  I  said,  Yerily,  I  will  till  hell  with 
genii  and  with  men  altogether  "  .  .  .  ^*  unto 
this  hath  he  created  them."  ^ 

Obviously  the  inevitable  eft'ect  of  teaching 
such  as  this  will  be  to  blunt  to  the  utmost  the 
sense   of   responsibility  and   of   ill-desert   for 


'Quoted  in  Clmke's  Ten  Great  Religions,  p.  478. 

»Sura  xxxii.  13;  xi.  119.    The  Quran  is  full  ot  similar  statements. 


Tlie  Doctrine   Concerning  Sin.  47 

wrongdoing.  If  a  man  sin,  the  Quran  itself 
assures  him  that  this  is  because  God  "hath 
bound  his  fate  about  his  neck  " ;  ^  so  that  the 
fault  is  not  man's  but  God's. 

The  teaching  of  Hindomsm  as  regards  sin,  is 
in  marked  contrast  alike  "vvith  both  Christianity 
and  Mohammedanism.  Both  of  these,  as  we 
have  seen,  agree  in  so  far  that  they  regard  sin 
as  an  evil  which  essentially  consists  in  opposi- 
tion to  the  will  of  a  personal  God.  But  ac- 
cording to  the  doctrinal  creed,  commonly  ac- 
cepted by  the  Hindoos,  sin,  in  this  Christian 
sense  of  the  word,  cannot  accurately  be  said  to 
exist.  Tliis  follows,  first,  from  the  denial  by 
orthodox  Hindooism  of  a  Godjwhgis  personal. 
If  there  is  no  personal  God,  then  law,  in  the 
Christian  or  Islamic  sense  of  the  word,  cannot 
exist,  for  law  is  the  expression  of  a  personal 
will.  Sin  in  the  Christian  sense  of  the  term, 
is  the  more  impossible,  because  the  a^ent  in 
every  act,  is  really  God.  If  so,  then  guilt  is 
but  a  fiction.  I  who  seem  to  be  the  agent,  in 
reality  am  not  the  agent. 

Again,  essential  to  the  Christian  conception 
of  sin,  is  this,  that  the  sinner  in  sinning  act 
freely.  If  a  man  do  a  thing  which  in  outward 
form  is  sinful,  but  do  this  under  constraint,  as 

» Sura  xvii.  14. 


48      TIandhook  of  Comparative  Religion, 

when  he  has  been  drugged,  and  simply  carries 
out  the  purpose  of  another,  his  own  will 
through  no  fault  of  his  being  in  abeyance, 
then  however  evil  and  ruinous  the  action  may 
be  in  itself,  there  is  no  sin,  and  no  responsi- 
bility or  guilt.  But  this  is  precisely  the  pop- 
ular creed  of  Hindooism ;  that  whatever  I  do, 
I  do  under  the  same  law  of  physical  necessity 
as  that  under  which  a  certain  tree  bears  a  cer- 
tain kind  of  fruit.  This  is  so  with  the  tree  be- 
cause of  the  nature  of  the  seed  which  was 
sown  ;  because  of  which  this  particular  kind  of 
fruit  is  borne,  and  no  other.  So  according  to 
the  universal  Hindoo  belief,  shared  alike  by 
the  most  ignorant  villagers  and  b}^  the  most 
learned  pundits,  all  that  I  am,  and  all  that  I 
do,  be  it  what  we  call  good,  or  be  it  evil,  is  the 
necessary  and  inevitable  result  of  certain  other 
acts  of  mine  in  a  previous  state  of  being,  of 
which  I  have  no  recollection,  but  the  fruit  of 
which  1  nevertheless  must  bring  forth,  of 
whatever  sort  it  be.  So  while  Hindooism  and 
Mohammedanism  agree  in  affirming  that  every- 
thing— even  the  evil  that  I  do — is  predeter- 
mined ;  yet  they  differ  profoundly,  in  that 
whereas  the  Mohammedan  believes  that  the 
predetermination  is  the  act  of  a  pei'sonal  God, 
who  wills  what  each  man  shall  do  or  sliall  not 


The  Doctrine   Concerning  Sin.  49 

do,  Hindooism  makes  the  predetermination  of 
all  things  to  be  simply  the  necessary  self-mani- 
festation of  the  unconscious  Brahma,  in  a  mul- 
titudinous and  almost  endless  series  of  in- 
dividual births  and  consequent  acts  of  human 
beings. 

Indeed,  the  reality  of  an  essential  distinction 
between  good  and  evil,  as  by  logical  necessity, 
so  often  in  actual  fact,  is  formally  denied. 
For  the  Hindoo  will  often  insist  that  if  we 
will  speak  accurately,  what  we  call  "  sin  "  pap^ 
and  "righteousness"  or  "merit,"  dharmma, 
2?iinya,  are  both  alike  evil ;  because  every  act, 
be  it  good  or  bad,  makes  it  necessary  that  I 
be  again  born  that  I  may  reap  its  fruit,  and 
that  personal  existence  in  some  form  should  be 
continued  ;  for  it  is  this,  and  not  Avhat  we  call 
sin,  that  is  really  the  fundamental  evil. 

And  if  the  conscience  or  reason  of  any  still 
rebel  against  such  teaching,  and  insist  on  the 
reality  of  the  distinction  between  moral  good 
and  evil,  sin  and  righteousness,  then  Hindooism 
has  yet  one  more  resource  by  which  to  silence 
the  Avitness  of  conscience.  This  is  found  in  its 
doctrine  of  mciycl  or  "  ijlusion."  Mciyd  is  that 
illusion  which  of  necessity  arises  when  the 
Supreme  Brahma,  essentially  unconditioned, 
{nirgun)   becomes  conditioned  {sagun)  in  the 


50      Handbook  of  Comparative  Religion. 

universe.  Of  this  may  a  are  begotten  the 
ideas  of  a  distinction  between  God  and  the 
world,  of  personality,  free  agency,  responsi- 
bility, sin  and  righteousness.  For  it  is  quite 
clear  that  if  indeed  Brahma  is  the  only  Being, 
then  there  is  no  room  for  sin,  and  the  idea  of 
sin  and  all  connected  with  it  must  be  illusion. 
In  this  way,  again,  orthodox  Hindooism  denies 
the  reality  of  sin  as  the  opposite  of  righteous- 
ness. 

Such  is  the  Hindoo  doctrine  as  to  the  nature 
of  sin.  It  wall  be  asked :  Do  men  in  India 
practically  accept  this  belief?  The  question 
cannot  be  answered  in  a  word.  ]^LQt_a_few 
there  are,  who  endeavor,  with  a  horrible  faith- 
fulness to  their  principles,  to  exhibit  those 
principles  in  actual  living.  Here  we  see  them 
walking  about  in  stark  nakedness  and  utter 
shamelessness ;  tliere,  again,  seeking  in  deep 
meditation  to  center  their  thoughts  on  this  one 
conception,  aham  Brahmam,  "  I  am  Brahma," 
and  so  to  cultivate  and  attain  an  absolute  free- 
dom alike  from  doing  right  and  doing  Avrong. 
With  such  the  writer  has  often  talked ;  and 
men  in  a  more  hopeless  moral  state  it  would 
be  impossible  to  find.  Furthermore,  the  real- 
ity of  any  necessary,  unchanging  distinction 
between  moral  right  and  w^rong,  is  practically 


The  Doctrine   Concerning  Sin.  51 

denied  by  every  one  in  the  constant  use  of 
the  popular  proverb  before  cited,  "To  the 
mighty  is  no  sin  " ;  and  in  the  refusal  to  admit 
that  the  indescribable  licentiousness  of  Krishna, 
or  the  horrible  bloodthirstiness  of  Shiva  or 
Kali,  is  in  the  least  incompatible  with  the  belief 
that  these  are  worthy  representations  of  the 
Deity.  When  men  do  wrong,  one  often  hears 
responsibility  denied  in  the  words :  "  True,  I 
have  sinned ;  but  what  fault  was  it  of  mine  ? 
It  w^as  in  my  karmmay 

And  yet  while,  logically,  no  Hindoo  should 
ever  admit  sin,  yet  their  Sacred  Books  have 
much  to  say  of  sin,  and  prescribe  many  pen- 
ances and  expiations  by  which  it  may  be  re- 
moved.    Well  known  is  the  Sanskrit  couplet : 

Phpohamiiiipakarmmaham  paphtmh  phpasmiibhavah 
Trhhi  mam  pundarikUksha  sarvvaphpaharo  mama. 
"  I  am  sin,  my  work  is  sin,  my  spirit  is  sin,  in  sin  was 

I  conceived : 
Save  me,  O  Lotus-eyed  One,  Remover  of  all  my  sin." 

The  Kig  Veda  even  speaks  of  a  sin  of  the 
fathers,  whose  sin  has  come  on  us.     Thus 

"  Absolve  us  from  the  sin  of  our  fathers, 
And  from  those  which  we  have  committed  with 
our  own  bodies."  • 

Especially  are  such  confessions  of  sin,  how- 

*  Rig  Veda.  vii.  86. 


62      Handbook  of  Coirvparative  Religion. 

ever,- to  be  found  in  the  modern  non-canonical 
writings  of  many  Hindoo  reformers,  who 
doubtless  became  such  because  the  sense  of  sin 
was  too  strong  in  them  for  the  Hindoo  creed. 
Such  are  the  following : 

"With  what  face  can  I  approach  thee?    Shame  cometh 

unto  me! 
Thou  knowest  the  evil  I  have  done.    How  can  1  be  pleasing 

tintothee?" 

"I  went  out  to  seek  a  bad  man  ;  bad  man  I  found  none  at 

all: 
If  I  look  into  my  own  heart,  Myself  la  the  worst  of  all." 

But  having  lost  sight  of  the  personality  of 
God,  and  therewith  of  the  true  nature  of  sin 
as  opposition  to  His  holy  will,  the  conceptions 
of  the  Hindoos  as  to  the  nature  of  sin — so  far 
as  it  is,  despite  philosophy,  admitted, — have 
been  perverted  and  degraded  correspondingly. 
A  man  will  lie  and  cheat  with  no  apparent 
sense  that  he  is  thereby  sinning ;  but  will  not 
so  much  as  touch  an  ^g^^  lest  he  should  thus 
become  defiled,  and  be  reckoned  as  a  sinner. 

If  it  be  possible,  the  Buddhist  religion  leaves 
even  less  room  for  a  right  conception  of  sin 
than  modern  Hindooism.  It  is  true  that  the 
Buddhist  Scriptures  have  much  to  say  of  sin, 
and  by  this  fact  many  who  are  ignorant  of  the 
true  significance  of  terms  in  the  Buddhist  re- 


The  Doctrine   Concerning  Sin.  5.S 

ligion,  and  so  read  into  this  word  "sin"  a 
Christian  meaning,  are  grievously  misled. 
Hence  a  degree  of  harmony  is  imagined  be- 
tween the  teachings  of  Gautama  Muni  and 
those  of  Jesus  Christ,  where  instead  there  is 
only  the  most  irreconcilable  antagonism. 

Kecalling  what  has  been  shown  in  a  former 
chapter  as  to  the  essentially  atheistic  character 
of  orthodox  Buddhism,  it  will  be  seen  at  once 
that  where  there  is  denial  of,  or  even  uncer- 
tainty as  to,  the  being  of  God,  there  cannot 
possibly  be  any  conception  of  sin  in  any  such 
sense  as  that  which  Christians  attach  to  the 
word.  For  the  very  essence  of  sin  lies  in  an- 
tagonism between  the  will  of  God  and  the  will 
of  man  ;  and  where  the  being  of  God  is  doubted 
or  denied,  as  in  Buddhism,  obviously  sin,  as  we 
understand  the  term,  cannot  be  recognized. 

If  it  be  asked  then,  What  is  it  that  the 
Buddhist  means  when  he  speaks  of  sin?  we 
answ^er,  that  according  to  the  Buddhist  Scrip- 
tures sin  consists  essentially  in  tanhd  {trishnd). 
Tanhd,  lit.  "thirst,"  means  "deske,"  and  is 
therefore  often  rendered  in  English  "lust," 
and  so  appears  as  identical  with  that  "lust" 
(Gr.  i-iOuiua)  of  which  the  apostle  James  says 
that  "  The  lust,  when  it  hath  conceived,  bear- 
eth  sin."  (k.  v.  James  i.  15.)  But  a  little  study 


54      Ilandhook  of  Co/ti^jarative  Religion. 

of  the  Buddhist  authorities  serves  to  show 
that  what  the  Buddhist  means  by  tanhd  is  far 
enough  removed  from  what  the  New  Testa- 
ment writers  mean  by  kruduiiia  "  lust."  As 
to  the  real  meaning  of  tanhd^  either  of  two 
views  may  be  maintained  with  good  show  of 
reason.  A  large  number  of  passages  in  the 
Buddhist  Scriptures  seem  to  teach  clearly  that 
by  tanhd  is  meant  desire  of  anything  what- 
ever, whether  in  this  life  or  another.  It  is 
directed  that  he  -  who  will  attain  to  peace 
"  learn  to  subdue  " — not  merely  evil  desires — 
but  "all  the  desires  that  arise  inwardly."^ 
The  Bhikkhu,  or  disciple  of  the  Buddha,  is 
charged  explicitly  not  to  "desire  anything 
whatever." 

Nevertheless  here  and  there  passages  occur 
which  seem  to  limit  this  all-inclusiveness  of 
the  term,  and  from  these  some  eminent  spe- 
cialists have  inferred  that  these  prohibitions  of 
desire  can  refer  only  to  such  aims  and  aspira- 
tions as  are  "  grasping  and  selfish."  ^  But  even 
if  we  take  the  term  in  this  restricted  sense,  we 
are  as  far  as  ever  from  the  Christian  meaning 
of  the  word  "  sin."  For  the  Buddhist  regards 
not  merely  those  acts  or  states  of  mind  as  self- 

«8ee  Sutta  Nipata  ;  Mnha  viyhha  Sntta  5-8. 
*  See  Rhys  Davids:  5«rfd/imn,  pp.  101, 106. 


TJn    Doctrine   Conceruitig  Sin.  55 

ish  whicli  we  should  so  call;  but  all  desire 
which  terminates  on  or  has  regard  to  self, 
and  thus  even  the  desire  for  a  life  of  happiness 
in  heaven.^  Hence,  while  no  doubt,  according 
to  the  J3uddhist  doctrine,  many  things  are  re- 
garded as  sinful  which  we  also  regard  as  sin, 
many  other  things  are  regarded  as  no  less  the 
otfspring  of  tanhd  and  therefore  sinful,  Avhich 
in  reality  are  not  sinful  in  the  least.  This 
utter  confusion  of  mind  on  the  subject  of  sin 
is  well  illustrated  by  the  list  of  "the  Ten 
Sins "  which  we  find  enumerated  in  Buddhist 
authorities.  These  are  said  to  be:  Doubt; 
Dependence  on  rites ;  Sensuality  ;  Bodily  pas- 
sions; Hatred,  or  ill-feeling;  Love  of  life  on 
earth  ;  Desire  for  life  in  heaven ;  Pride ;  Self- 
righteousness  ;  and  Ignorance. 

The  wide  divergence  between  the  Buddhist 
and  the  Christian  conception  of  sin  is  no  less 
strikingly  shown  by  the  Buddhist  Decalogue, 
as  contrasted  with  the  Mosaic.  The  ten  com- 
mands are  as  f ollow^s :— (1)  Take  not  life  (of 
any  living  thing);  (2)  Do  not  lie;  (3)  Do  not 
steal ;  (4)  Do  not  commit  adultery ;  (5)  Do  not 
drink  what  can  intoxicate.  These  five  only, 
indeed,  are  regarded  as  obligatory  on  the  ordi- 
nary Buddhist  layman ;  but  for  him  who  will 

•  This  is  reckoned  one  of  "  The  Ten  Sins." 


56      Hand  hook  of  Comjparatvm  Religion. 

become  an  Ar^hat  or  saint,  the  fourth  com- 
mand above  given  is  modified  to  a  command 
to  lead  a  chaste  celibate  life,  and  then  the  Dec- 
alogue is  completed  as  follows :  (6)  Eat  not  at 
prohibited  times;  (7)  AVear  no  garlands,  and 
use  no  dentrifices  or  perfumes;  (8)  Sleep  on 
no  high  or  broad  bed ;  (9)  Abstain  from  music, 
dancing,  and  from  stage  plays;  (10)  Abstain 
from  the  use  of  gold  or  silver. 

As  these  ten  commands  constitute  the  Deca- 
logue, perfect  conformity  to  which  is  one  mark 
of  the  perfected  Buddhist  saint,  therefore  the 
doing  of  any  of  these  prohibited  things  is  a 
sin.  So  we  see  that  not  only  lying,  stealing 
and  adultery,  but  also  using  tooth  powders, 
singing  even  the  purest  and  most  elevating 
song  or  hymn,  and  even  the  use  of  gold  and 
silver  in  the  ordinary  and  most  necessary 
transactions  of  life, — all  these  things  are  reck- 
oned sin.  Surely  this  is  enough  to  show  that 
when  any  one,  in  reading  anything  regarding 
sin  in  any  Buddhist  book,  understands  that 
word  in  the  Christian  sense,  he  is  under  a 
misapprehension  which  must  lead  him  utterly 
astray  in  his  understanding  and  estimate  of 
the  moral  value  of  the  Buddhist  religion  as 
compared  with  Christianity. 

In  reading  the  teachings  of  Confucius,  one 


Tht  Doctrine   Coacerning  Siii.  5t 

cannot  but  again  be  impressed  deeply  with  the 
total  absence  of  any  adequate  conception  of 
sin.  Among  the  "Five  Kelations  of  Life,"' 
the  relation  of  man  to  God  is  not  mentioned. 
Indeed,  since  sin  consists  in  a  disturbance 
of  the  relation  between  man  and  God,  there 
is  obviously  no  room  in  Confucianism  for  the 
Christian  conception  of  sin.  Whether  Con- 
fucius was  at  heart  an  atheist  or  agnostic  or 
not,  it  is  certain  that  he  never  clearly  recog- 
nizes any  duties  but  such  as  are  due  from  man 
to  man.  Indeed,  occasionally  he  seems  to  go 
further,  and  enter  his  voice  against  the  recog- 
nition of  such  duties.  Said  he :  "  To  give  one's 
self  earnestly  to  the  duties  due  to  men,  and 
while  respecting  spiritual  beings,  to  keep  aloof 
from  them,  may  be  called  wisdom."  ^ 

The  views  of  Laou  Tzse  it  is  difficult  to  set 
forth  Avith  exactness.  His  works  are  said  by 
Chinese  scholars  to  be  difficult  of  understand- 
ing even  by  the  Chinese  themselves.  But  in 
what  of  his  teachings  has  been  made  accessible 
to  European  readers,  it  is  as  difficult  to  find 
any  clear  recognition  by  him  of  duties  due 
from  man  to  God,  as  in  the  teachings  of  Con- 

'  These  are:— the  relation   of  friend  to  friend,  of  brother  to 
brotlier,  of  husband  to  wife,  of  fatlier  to  son,  and  of  ruler  to 

^"*  QuoVed  in  the  Schaff-Herzog  Encyclopoedla,  in  article,  "  Con- 
fucius," vol.  1.,  p.  532, 


oS      Ihindhook  of  Coirqjarative  Religion. 

fuciiis.  As  to  the  duties  of  man  to  his  fellow, 
he  said  much  which  is  good  and  true;  but 
that  there  are  duties  due  from  man  to  God, 
and  that  in  these  man  fails,  and  is  therefore 
a  sinner,  of  this  we  have  yet  to  find  any  ac- 
knowledgment. Indeed,  Professor  Douglas 
tells  us  that  Laou  Tzse,  like  Confucius,  "  held 
that  man's  nature  was  good,  and  that  he  who 
acted  in  all  things  with  the  uncontaminated 
instincts  of  that  nature,  would  eventually  re- 
turn home  to  Taou."  ^ 

How  very  profound  is  the  difference  be- 
tween the  chief  non-Christian  religions,  and 
that  of  Jesus  Christ,  in  their  teaching  as  to 
sin,  we  have  now  seen.  But  these,  again,  in- 
volve differences  no  less  profound  and  radical 
in  regard  to  the  vital  matter  of  salvation. 
What  the  great  world-religions  teach  on  this 
subject,  we  shall  see  in  the  next  chapter. 

»  CoTifucianism  and  Taouism,  p.  196. 


CHAPTER  y. 

THE   DOCTRINE   REGARDING    SALVATION. 

If  an^'tliing  be  vital  to  religion,  it  is  the 
c^uestion  of  man's  salvation.  That  the  human 
race  is  in  an  evil  condition,  that  men  are  in 
bondage  to  various  evil  tendencies  and  pas- 
sions, is  admitted,  as  we  have  seen,  in  all  re- 
ligions. Hence  the  question  is  fundamental  in 
religion,  how  man  may  be  saved  from  sin  and 
its  present  and  future  manifold  miseries. 

Evidently,  man  needs  two  things,  namely 
pardon  and  cleansing.  He  is  in  a  state  of 
manifest  disharmony  with  God.  Among  men 
of  all  ages  and  all  religions  we  find  variously 
expressed  this  sense  of  alienation  from  God. 
Very  touching  utterance  has  sometimes  been 
given  to  the  need  which  is  felt  of  reconcilia- 
tion between  man  and  God  ;  more  frequently, 
perhaps,  in  other  than  the  canonical  books  of 
the  various  ethnic  religions.  Thus,  in  North 
India,  Kabir  Das  lamented : 

*'  Master  !   Master !  all  are  saying ;  but  I  have  another  con- 
cern : 
I'm  not  with  the  Master  acquainted  !    Ah !  where  shall  I 
sit  in  His  presence?  " 

59 


(oO      Handhooh  of  Comjxirative  Religion. 

But  man  needs  more  than  pardon ;  he  needs 
also  cleansing  and  deliverance  from  the  pres- 
ence and  power  of  sin.  This  is  also  admitted 
among  men  of  all  races  and  religions.  Again 
and  again,  by  one  and  another  in  non-Chris- 
tian lands,  the  sense  of  this  need  has  been 
most  pathetically  expressed,  as  thus  in  South 
India : 

•*  Purification  before  the  great  God 
Is  greater  than  lite  and  is  stronger  than  death  ; 
'Tis  the  hope  of  the  wise,  'tis  the  prize  of  the  saint. 
Where  is  the  fount  whence  flows  tliis  pure  stream?" 

On  this  momentous  subject,  the  Christian 
teaching  is  very  clear  and  emphatic.  In  the 
first  place,  the  Christian  Scriptures  teach  that 
man  is  wholly  unable,  by  any  effort  or  expe- 
dient of  his  own,  to  attain  either  to  assured 
reconciliation  and  peace  with  God,  or  to  de- 
liverance from  the  power  of  sin.  As  regards 
reconciliation  with  God,  the  apostle  Paul  only 
sums  up  the  teaching  of  all  Scripture  when  he 
declares  that  "  by  the  deeds  of  the  law  shall 
no  flesh  be  justified  in  his  sight."  ^  AYhile  no 
other  religion  admits  this  in  theory,  yet  his- 
torically nothing  is  clearer  than  that  this  is 
the  practical  confession  of  all  men.     For  no 

'  Rom.  lii.  20. 


The  Doctrine  Regarding  Salvation.      61 

sooner  is  one  supposed  work  of  merit  com- 
pleted, whether  sacrifice,  penance,  lustration, 
than  straightway  the  man  undertakes  another, 
thus  unwittingly  confessing  that  the  sought- 
for  certitude  of  pardon,  and  peace  of  con- 
science, has  not  yet  been  attained. 

The  Scriptures  teach,  in  the  second  place,  that 
man  is  equally  unable  to  deliver  himself  from 
the  bondage  to  sin,  and  secure  purity  of  heart. 
The  Lord  Jesus  Christ  said  plainly :  "  Who- 
soever committeth  sin,  is  the  servant  [slave]  of 
sin."  ^ 

Again,  the  Christian  Scriptures  teach  that 
what  man  is  thus  unable  to  do  for  himself, 
God  is  both  able  and  willing  to  do  for  him ; 
and  that  He  has  in  fact  provided  for  the  pardon 
and  purification  of  every  man  who  will  have 
the  blessing,  through  the  incarnation,  atoning 
death,  resurrection,  and  exaltation  of  His  only- 
begotten  Son  Jesus  Christ  to  the  right  hand  of 
power. 

As  for  the  Incarnation,  the  statements  of 
Holy  Scripture  are  such  as  these :  The  Word, 
by  whom  "  all  things  were  made,"  "  was  made 
flesh  and  dwelt  among  us."^  The  Son  of  man 
'.'came  down  from  heaven,"  to  do  the  will  of 
Him  that  sent  Him.^     Jesus  speaks  of  a  glory 

'  John  vlil.  34.  « John  1.  3.  14.  '  John  vl.  88. 


62      Handbook  of  Comrparatlce  Religion. 

which  He  "had  with  the  Father  before  the 
world  was,"  ^  Avhich  glory  He  left,  to  come  into 
the  world  to  save  man.  The  apostle  Paul 
goes  not  a  word  bej'^ond  the  explicit  teaching 
of  Christ  Himself,  when  he  says  that  He  "  be- 
ing in  the  form  of  God,  counted  it  not  a  prize 
to  be  on  an  equality  with  God,  but  emptied 
Himself,  taking  the  form  of  a  servant,  being 
made  in  the  likeness  of  men ;  and  being  found 
in  fashion  as  a  man,  He  humbled  Himself,  be- 
coming obedient  even  unto  death."  ^ 

As  to  the  relation  of  the  work  of  Jesus 
Christ  to  the  salvation  of  men,  the  sacred 
writers  are  also  unanimous  and  explicit.  The 
apostles  uniformly  teach  that  man's  salvation 
is  secured,  primarily,  not  through  the  moral 
influence  of  the  holy  life  or  self-sacrificing 
death  of  Jesus  Christ,  but  through  that  death 
as  an  expiation  for  sin.  He  is  said,  with  al- 
lusion to  the  ancient  Jewish  sacrifices,  to  be 
"the  Lamb  of  God  which  taketh  away  the  sin 
of  the  world  "  ;  ^  and  to  be  "  the  propitiation 
for  our  sins."  ^  We  are  said  to  be  "  reconciled  " 
by  His  death,  even  as,  being  thus  reconciled, 
we  are  "  saved  by  His  [glorified]  life."  ^  He 
is  said  to  have  "  put  away  sin  by  the  sacrifice 

'  John  xvll.  6.  » Phil.  li.  6-8  (r.  v.). 

'  John  i.  29.  *  I  John  11.  2 ;  Rom.  ill.  26. 

'  Rom.  V.  10, 


The  Doctrine  Regarding  Salvation.      03 

of  Himself  "  ;  ^  to  have  been  "delivered  up  on 
account  of  our  offenses,"  ^  so  that  we  are 
"justified,"  3  not  by  our  own  works,  but  "by 
His  blood." '  And  all  these  and  numerous 
similar  statements  only  reproduce  in  varied 
form  what  our  Lord  explicitly  said  of  Himself, 
that  He  came,  not  merely  to  set  men  a  noble 
example,  and  lure  them  to  God  by  the  beauty 
of  holiness,  but  "  tcL^ve_His  life  as  a  ran- 
som for  many,"  ^  and  shed  His  blood  "  for  the 
remission  of  sins."  ^ 

^  As  the  Christian  teaching  concerning  recon-   z  y    (^ 
ciliationiof  God  is  on  this  wise,  so  it  is  also        '\<-^. 
taught  with  equal  clearness,  that  as  pardon,  so     r  ^,  .    ' 
also  purification  of  the  heart  and  life,  is  at- 
tainable only  through  the  power  of  this  same 
Christ,  working  in  us  by  the  Holy  Spirit.    We 
are  said  to  be  saved  "  by  His  life."  ^    He  is  said 
to  be  "  able  to  save  to  the  uttermost  them  that 
draw  near  unto  God  through  Him,  seeing  He 
ever  liveth  to  make  intercession  for  them."» 
We  are  said  to  be  made  "  free  from  the  law  of 
sin  and  of  death,"  to  which  we  are  all  by  na- 
ture in  bondage,  by  "  the  law  of  the  Spirit  of 
life  in  Christ  Jesus." ^     The  atoning  death  it- 

\  p  ?,^-  r.-  ?n  *  K^"»-  J^-  25,  Greek. 

*R(>m.  111.  20.  *R()m  V  9 

'  Matt.  XX  28.  -» Matt.  xxvl.  28. 

•a:;;iii.%(K.v.).         •Heb.vi,.25(K.v., 


64      Handbook  of  Comparative  Religion. 

self  is  represented  as  in  order  to  this  end.  He 
is  said  to  have  reconciled  us  "  through  [His] 
death,"  in  order  to  present  us  "holy  and  with- 
out blemish  and  unreprovable  before  Him 
[God]."^ 

And  as  to  the  way  in  which  men  may  secure 
this  pardon  and  purity  of  heart  Avhich  is  pro- 
vided for  us  in  Christ,  the  Scriptures  teach 
that  both  the  pardon  and  the  purification  and 
deliverance  come  through  faith.  "By  Him 
every  one  that  believeth  is  justified  from  all 
things."  ^  Sanctification  also  is  declared  to  be 
"by  faith  in"  Him.^ 

Finally,  the  Scriptures  which  teach  these 
things  teach  no  less  explicitly  that  this  is  not 
merely  one  way,  or  the  best  of  mau}^  ways  of 
salvation,  but  the  onh;^\va}^  The  apostle  de- 
clared :  "  There  is  none  other  name  under 
heaven  given  .  .  .  whereby  we  must  be 
saved."  ^  Even  to  His  own  disciples  Jesus  said, 
with  regard  to  holy  living :  "  Apart  from  Me 
ye  can  do  nothing."  ^  That  men  may  also  be 
saved  by  faithful  following  of  the  prescrip- 
tions of  other  religions,  although  in  these  days 
a  very  popular  opinion,  is  not  only  a  thought 
wholly   foreign    to   biblical   teaching,   but   is 

'  Col.  i.  22  (R.  v.).  '  Acts  xlii.  39  (R.  v.). 

^  Arts  xxvi.  18.  *Actsiv.  12. 

'John  XV.  5  (R.  v.). 


The  Dopfrine  Regarding  Salvation.      65 

again  iiiid  again  directly  contradicted  in  the 
Scriptures.  Concerning  all  who  had  come  be- 
fore Him,  and  offered  themselves  to  men  for 
their  spiritual  shepherds,  Jesus  Himself  said : 
"All  that  came  before  Me  are  thieves  and 
robbers."  '  So  much  for  the  biblical  doctrine 
as  to  the  Avay  of  salvation. 

The  Mohammedan  doctrine  of  salvation 
stands  in  the  sharpest  contrast  with  all  this. 
While  according  to  the  teaching  of  our  Lord, 
salvation  is,  above  all,  a  salvation  from  the 
po\ier  and  the  presence  of  sin ;  and  deliverance 
from  the  penalty  of  sin,  is  simply  in  order  to 
this  end ;  on  the  other  hand,  in  the  Moham- 
medan conception,  salvation  consists  merely  in 
delrveiMceJiNom^^  The  connection 

of  salvation  with  holiness  of  character,  as  per- 
taining to  its  very  essence,  is  so  completely  lost 
sight  of,  that,  as  above  noted,  one  of  the  most 
enlightened  Maulavis  in  India  has  declared  that 
God,  in  virtue  of  His  absolute  sovereignty,  may 
even  save  some  who  have  never  repented  of 
sin.^  Hence  there  may  easily  be  impenitent 
sinners  in  Paradise  ! 

With  such  low  views  of  the  evil  of  sin,  and 
indifference  to  deliverance  from  it,  it  is  not 
surprising  that  Islam  utterly  denies  the  need 

'Johnx.  8.  ^Seeabovep,  18. 


66      Jlandhooh  of  Comparatice  Religion. 

of  anj^  expiatory  sacrifice  in  order  to  the 
pardon  of  sin.  The  Christian  doctrine  of 
atonement  is  in  the  Quran  denied  again  and 
again  in  the  most  explicit  manner.  Thus  re- 
peatedly it  is  written  to  this  effect :  *'  No  soul 
shall  acquire  any  merits  or  demerits  but  for 
itself;  and  no  burdened  soul  shall  bear  the 
burden  of  another ;  "  ^  "  Nothing  shall  be  im- 
puted to  a  man  for  righteousness  except  his 
own  labor." 

Hence,  as  is  well  knoAvn,  Mohammedanism 
also  denies  with  emphasis  the  Incarnation  of 
the  Son  of  God.  Christ  Jesus  was  merely  a 
man ;  a  prophet,  no  doubt,  but  yet  a  mere 
man  like  Abraham,  Moses,  and  the  other 
prophets ;  greater  than  those  before  him,  but 
less  than  Mohammed.^  With  so  little  appre- 
hension of  the  evil  of  sin,  it  is  not  strange  that 
the  doctrine  of  the  New  Testament,  of  an  in- 
carnation in  order  to  a  Divine  atonement  for 
sin,  should  find  no  place  in  Islam.  There  is 
no  logical  place  for  it,  if  Mohammedan  postu- 
lates be  granted.  The  Quran  once  and  again 
declares  that  those  who  regard  Jesus  as  God, 
are  "  infidels,"  and  for  them  a  special  hell 
(I<aza)  is  prepared.     The  affirmation  of  the  In- 

'  Sura  vi.  164. 

'And  yet,  strangely,  while  the  sinfulness  nl  Molianunert  Is  ad- 
mitted in  the  Quran,  Jesus  is  represented  as  a  sinless  prophet! 


The  Doctrine  Regarding  Salvation.      67 

carnation  iy  ^'  ^hirl\'''  the  greatest  sin  of  which 
a  man  can  be  guilty.  It  is  knfr,  blasphemy 
— against  God. 

It  should  be  noted,  however,  in  passing,  that 
notwithstanding  all  this,  even  in  Islam  the 
crying  need  of  the  human  soul  for  an  incarna- 
tion and  for  atoning  blood  is  "witnessed.  In- 
consistently enough,  sacrifice  is  required  of 
every  good  Mohammedan.  It  is  true  that  the 
expiatory  idea  is  ignored,  and  the  Moham- 
medan sacrifices  are  explained  as  commemora- 
tive  of  the  readiness  of  the  patriarch  Abraham 
to  offer  up  Isaac,  as  self-dedicatory,  or  as  of- 
fered by  way  of  thanksgiving.  Still,  behind 
these  lies  none  the  less  truly,  even  though  un- 
consciously, the  original  Avitness  of  the  human 
heart  to  the  need  of  incarnation  and  atoning 
blood  in  order  to  salvation.  Moreover,  va- 
rious sects  among  the  Mohammedans,  as,  e.  g., 
the  Babis  in  Persia,  and  the  followers  of  the 
Caliph  Hakim  in  Egypt,  hold  to  some  notion 
of  an  incarnation;  and  the  Shais  in  India 
maintain  that  the  deaths  of  Hosein  and  Hasan 
at  Kerbela  were  expiatory  of  sin. 

As  for  deliverance  from  the  presence  of  sin, 
and  the  attainment  of  holiness,  Mohammed 
has  simply  nothing  to  say  on  the  subject.  A 
missionary  to   Egypt   states  that  he  has  ex- 


68      Handbook  of  Comjjarative  Religion. 

amined  every  passage  in  the  Quran  with  refer- 
ence to  this  question  of  personal  holiness,  and 
as  the  result  declares  that  "  it  is  a  hopeless 
task  to  look  for  .  .  .  the  doctrine  of  the 
necessity  of  purity  of  heart  in  the  Quran." 
There  is  therefore  no  suggestion  whatever  as 
to  the  way  of  its  attainment. 

In  the  Quran  the  means  of  such  a  salvation 
as  it  recognizes,  is  said  to  be  faith ;  but  this, 
again,  not  in  the  Christian  sense.  There  is  no 
element  of  trust  in  a  loving  and  forgiving  God 
and  Saviour.  Faith  is  represented  as  consist- 
ing merely  in  an  intellectual,  nay  even  igno- 
rant, unintelligent,  and  merely  verbal  assent  to 
the  Kalima  : — "  There  is  no  God  but  God  and 
Mohammed  is  His  prophet."  Qopd  works, 
however,  have  their  place  in  obtaining  salva- 
tion. Especially  important  is  it  to  observe 
daily  the  five  times  of  prayer,  to  give  alms,  to 
fast  from  sunrise  to  sunset  throughout  the 
whole  month  of  Eamazan,  and  once  in  the  life 
to  make  the  pilgrimage  to  Mecca.  Sometimes 
language  is  used  which  seems  to  ascribe  to 
good  works  a  direct  efficacy  in  the  |)rocure- 
ment  of  salvation. 

Thus  it  is  said  that  if  believers  who  give 
alms  conceal  them,  and  give  unto  the  poor, 
"  this  will  be  better  for  vou,  and  will  atone  for 


The  Doctrine  Reyardiny  Salvation.      69 

Practically,  it  is  fair  to  sa}^  that 
Mohammedanism  teaches  the  merit  of  good 
works,  and  their  efficacy  as  a  e-round — thono-h 

•'  I/O  o 

not  a  certain  ground — of  acceptance  with  God. 

Finally,  Mohammedanism  teaches  no  less 
emphatically  than  the  Christian  Sci'iptures 
that  there  is  only  one  way  of  salvation :  but 
whereas  in  the  gospel  Chi^ist  declares  Himself 
to  be  the  only  Way,  and  His  Name  the  only 
name  given  under  heaven  whereby  men  may 
be  saved,  the  Quran  teaches  that  thei-e  is  no 
salvation  for  any  outside  of  Islam.  "Whoso- 
ever followeth  any  other  religion  than  Islam, 
it  shall  not  be  accepted  of  him ;  and  in  the 
next  life  he  shall  be  of  those  that  perish."  ^ 

Very  different  alike  from  the  Christian  and 
the  Mohammedan  conception  of  salvation,  is 
that  of  Himlooism.  Xo  more  than  in  Islam, 
is  the  question  how  to  be  rid  of  the  sinful 
heart  and  character ;  but  rather  how  to  escape 
from  the  various  sufferings  incident  to  this 
embodied  life.  But,  according  to  the  com- 
monly accepted  notion,  these  various  suffer- 

'  Suva  ii.  271. 

'Siiia  iii.  84.  It  is  indeed  true  that  in  Suva  ii.  61,  an  early  Sura, 
given  at  Medina,  it  is  said  tliat  Jews,  Cliristians.  and  Sabians,  in  a 
word,  "  wlioever  l)elievetli  in  God  and  tlie  last  day,  and  dotii  tliat 
wliicli  is  rijrlit  shall  have  their  reward  witl)  their'Lord.  and  there 
shall  come  no  fear  on  them."  But  it  is  generally  agreed  by  tlie 
Mohammedan  doctors  that  tliis  early  deliverance  was  degraded 
by  the  passage  given  in  the  text. 


70      Hatidbooh  of  Cornparative  Religion. 

ings  and  troubles  of  life,  are  in  fact  insepa- 
rable from  personal  existence.  Hence  when 
the  Hindoo  speaks  of  mukti.,  which  is  the  term 
usually  employed  by  Indian  Cliristians  to 
denote  '"  salvation,"  he  means  something  very 
different  from  Avhat  we  mean.  The  word 
strictly  means  "  HJDersytion,''  but  connotes  noth- 
ing' as  to  what  that  is  from  which  one  is  liber- 
ated.  With  the  Christian,  rtmhti  is  "liber- 
ation" from  sin;  but  with  the  Hindoo  it  is 
liberation  from  personal  conscious  existence. 

All  sects  of  Hindoos  believe  in  the  doctrine 
of  transmigration.  When  a  man  dies  he  is  or- 
dinarily born  again,  either  in  this  world  or 
some  other :  but  in  any  case  this  rebirth  in- 
volves at  least  the  liability  to  manifold  pains 
and  troubles.  As  a  South  India  Folk  Song 
puts  it : 

"How  mauy  births  are  past,  I  cauuot  tell. 
How  many  yet  to  come  no  man  can  say : 
But  this  alone  I  know,  and  know  full  well, 
That  pain  and  grief  embitter  all  tlie  way." 

Deliverance  from  this  necessity  of  repeated 
births,  whether  into  this  w-orld,  or  one  of  the 
heavens  or  of  the  hells,  is  what  the  Hindoo 
means  when  he  talks  of  obtaining  salvation. 
I  do  not  recollect  ever  to  have  met  the  con- 


The   Doctrine  Ueijardinij  Salvation,      71 

ception  in  any  authority  on  modern  orthodox 
Ilindooism  that  salvation  essentially  consists 
in  deliverance  from  sin,  in  an  inner  radical 
transformation  of  character. 

As  to  the  means  of  salvation,  understood  in 
the  Hindoo  sense,  it  is  taught,  in  general,  that 
there  are  two  ways,  namely,  the  gydn  mdrg^ 
"  the  way  of  knowledge,'^  and  IhaMi  mdrg^  or 
"the  way  of  devotion,"  or — as  some  have 
chosen  to  put  it — of  faith.  From  those  who 
advocate  the  superior  excellence  of  the  way  of 
knowledge,  one  often  hears  language  which 
sounds  very  like  the  teaching  of  Christ,  that 
to  know  God  is  life  eternal.  But  the  knowl- 
edge intended  is  very  different  in  the  two 
cases.  The  knowledge,  the  attainment  of 
which,  according  to  the  gydn  mdrgis  becomes 
the  instrument  of  liberation,  is  the  recognition 
of  mv  essential  identity  with  Brahma,  the 
impersonal  God;  whence  it  follows  that  all 
that  consciousness  testifies  to  the  contrary  is 
an  illusion;  as  is  frankly  admitted.  It  is 
taught  that  this  transcendental  knowledge  is 
to  be  attained  by  the  diligent  practice  of  va- 
rious ascetic  observances,  which  space  will  not 
allow  us  to  detail.  For  this  reason,  the  gydn 
mdrg\  has  not  had  the  popularity  that  the 
hhal'ti   mdrg   has   had.     This   is   the   way   of 


72      Handbook  of  Coinparatioe  Religion. 

"  devotion,"  or  "  faith  "  in  personal  deities,  es- 
pecially in  the  god  Krishna.  But  this  hhal'f) 
is  as  different  as  possible  from  the  Christian 
conception  of  faith  in  Christ.  For  nowhere  is 
it  taught  that  either  Krishna  or  any  other  of 
the  personal  objects  of  worship  has  done  any- 
thing for  the  sinner's  salvation ;  nor  do  they 
propose  to  do  anything  for  him.  His  liber- 
ation is  to  be  obtained  b}^  something  which  he 
is  to  do  himself ;  namely,  by  the  maintenance 
of  a  certain  frame  of  mind  toward  the  deity 
whom  he  worships. 

In  the  Bhagavad  Gita,  wherein  it  is  at- 
tempted to  combine  these  two  contrasted 
schemes  of  salvation,  it  is  taught  that  the 
hhaUi  w4iich  thus  saves  consists  in  doing 
everything  with  exclusive  reference  to  Krishna, 
Avithout  regard  to  any  pleasure  or  other  ad- 
vantage or  benefit  to  be  derived  from  such  ac- 
tions. Ordinarily,  it  is  taught,  we  are  by  our 
actions,  good  and  bad,  bound  to  the  necessity 
of  repeated  births.  Hence  the  ideal  of  the 
gydn  mdrgh  is  to  renounce  "  action  "  ;  an  ideal 
most  nearl}^  attained  by  some  of  the  Hindoo 
ascetics,  who  sit  day  after  day  Tvith  their  eyes 
closed,  apparently  oblivious  to  all  about  them, 
endeavoring  to  think  nothing  but  this  one 
thought,  Tadaham,  "  I  am  That,"  i.  e.,  Brahma. 


The  Doctnnt  Ueyardiny  Salvation.      I'd 

But  the  more  popular  Bhagavad  teaches  that 
this  end  may  be  more  easily  attained.  Even 
although  I  act,  as  is  necessary  for  most  men  in 
this  world,  I  may  be  saved,  if  only  my  actions 
be  all  performed  without  any  reference  to  any 
advantage,  here  or  hereafter,  which  may  come 
to  me  through  them. 

In  the  primitive  Yedic  religion  of  India, 
there  is  much  which  reminds  one  of  the  Chris- 
tian doctrine  of  the  necessity  of  a  Divine 
atonement  to  the  forgiveness  of  sin.  In  the 
Rig  Yeda  w^e  find  expressions  such  as  this : 
"Do  thou,  by  means  of  sacrifice,  take  away 
from  us  all  sin."  ^  In  the  Tandya  Maha  Brah- 
mana  of  the  Sama  Yeda  it  is  said  of  sacrifice : 
"Thou  art  the  annulment  of  sin — of  sin!" 
Kot  only  so,  but  the  doctrine  of  that  early 
time  was  that  Frajapati,  the  Lord  and  Saviour 
of  the  universe,  gave  Himself  for  men.  Thus 
it  is  written  in  the  Satapatha  Brahmana: 
"  The  Lord  of  creatures  gave  Himself  for  them ; 
for  He  became  their  sacrifice."  In  the  Tait- 
tiriya  Brahmana  it  is  Avritten :  "  The  sacrifice 
is  the  victim ;  it  (the  sacrifice)  takes  the  sacri- 
ficer  to  the  blessed  place." 

But  these  ancient  conceptions,  so  marvel- 
ously  near  the  truth  set  forth  in  the  gospel, 

•  Rig  Veda  x.  133-6. 


74      Handbook  of  Cornj)(jrative  Religion. 

have  practically  disappeared  from  modern 
Hindooism.  The  place  which  is  occupied  by 
sacrifice — now  much  less  frequent — in  the 
modern  religion,  is  very  different.  In  these 
days,  tlie  ideas  of  atonement  and  substitution 
are  not  commonly  connected  mlLtheLsacrifice. 
It  is  instead  regarded  either  as  an  offering  of 
food  to  the  god  which  is  worshiped,  or  as  in 
order  to  the  placation  of  some  angry  demon. 
But  while  we  cannot  say,  that  atonement,  in 
the  sense  of  the  substitution  of  a  sacrificed 
victim  for  the  sinner,  in  order  to  the  expiation 
of  his  sin,  is  a  doctrine  of  modern  Hindooism ; 
yet  it  is  still  believed  that  sin  must  be  expiated, 
in  order  to  salvation ;  and  this  by  the  sinner's 
own  voluntary  or  involuntary  acts  or  suffer- 
ings. That  is,  whatever  evil  one  does,  the  ill- 
desert  of  the  act  must  be  expiated,  either 
through  some  penasce  {prdyaschitt)  enjoined 
by  the  Brahmans,  or  by  suffering  in  some  fit. 
ture  birth.  But  it  is  held  equally  true  that 
whatever  good  one  may  do,  this  also,  no  less 
than  the  evil,  makes  a  rebirth  necessary,  in 
order  that  he  may  reap  the  fruit  of  this.  But 
this  is  far  enough  from  the  Christian  doctrine 
of  atonement. 

The  Hindoos,  as  is  well  known,  generally  be- 
lieve in  the  incarnation  of  the  Deity.    Concern- 


Tin    JhH'frint   keijardiiuj  Salvation.      75 

ing  this,  it  is  the  orthodox  doctrine  that  there 
thus  far  have  been  nine  incarnations  (avatars),' 
and  that  a  tenth,  commonly  known  as  the 
Nishhdank  Avatar,  or  "  Sinless  Incarnation," 
is  still  future.  It  has  often  been  fancied  that 
in  this  doctrine  of  incarnation  we  have  a  very 
close  agreement  with  Christian  doctrine.  But 
in  reality,  between  the  Christian  and  the  Hin- 
doo doctrine  as  to  the  incarnation  of  the  Deity, 
there  is  much  more  of  contrast  than  of  agree- 
ment. 

In  the  first  place,  it  is  the  Christian  doctrine 
of  the  Incarnation  tliat  Jesus  Christ  was_G,od 
incarnate  in  a  sense  unique  and  exclusive.  On 
the  contrary,  the  Hindoo  doctrine,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  universal  ])antheism,  is  that  the 
distinction  between  men  in  general  and  the  so- 
called  incarnations,  is  not  in  kind,  but  in  de- 
gree only.  All  men  are  incarnations  of  the 
Deity,  each  in  his  measure ;  and  even  among 
the  ten  who  are  regarded  as  incarnations  j;r//' 
excellence,  some  are  said  to  have  had  more, 
some  less,  of  the  Divine  nature. 

Secondly,  tlie  incarnation  of  the  Son  of  God, 
according  to  Xew  Testament  teaching,  was  in 
its  very  nature  incapable  of  repetition  ;  while, 
as  just  remarked,  the  Hindoos  maintain  that  in 

'  Lit.  "descents." 


T6      Handbook  of  Comjjaratwe  Religion. 

the  special  supereminent  sense  there  have 
already  been  nine  incarnations  of  the  Deity, 
and  that  a  tenth  is  yet  to  come.  Again,  the 
Christian  doctrine  lays  stress  upon  the  fact 
that  the  incarnation  of  the  Son  of  God  was  a 
\'^luntary:__act ;  while  Hindooism  expressly 
teaches  that  the  supposed  incarnations  of  the 
Deity,  no  less  reaDy  than  the  births  of  ordi- 
nary men,  were  the  necessary  fruit  of  works 
done  by  the  incarnate  one  in  a  previous  state 
of  existence.  They  could  not  therefore  be  ex- 
pressions of  the  Divine  love  to  lost  sinners, 
and  as  a  matter  of  fact,  are  never  so  repre- 
sented. Further,  whereas  our  blessed  Lord  is 
declared  to  have  been  withoiiLsui,  "holy, 
harmless,  undefiled  and  separate  from  sinners," 
all  the  Hindoo  incarnations  thus  far  are  repre- 
sented as  having  been  sinful ;  indeed,  many  of 
them  are  set  forth  as  having  differed  from 
ordinary  men  in  nothing  more  than  in  having 
utterly  transcended  them  in  impurity  of  life, 
hatred,  anger,  and  vindictiveness.  The  doctrine 
of  the  "sinless  incarnation"  yet  to  ap])ear,  is 
however  very  suggestive,  as  being  a  virtual  con- 
fession, which  seems  to  express  the  sense  of 
the  Hindoos  that  these  supposed  incarnations 
hitherto,  as  having  been  thus  sinful,  have  not 
fulfilled  the  ideal  of  a  Divine  incarnation. 


The  Doctrine  Regarding  Salvation.      77 

Finally,  whereas  it  is  said  to  have  been  the 
object  of  the  incarnation  of  our  Lord  that  He 
might  save  His  people  from  their  sins,  this  is 
never  in  the  Hindoo  Scriptures  once  repre- 
sented as  the  purpose  of  any  of  their  incarna- 
tions. On  the  contrary,  the  Deity  is  again 
and  again  said  to  have  assumed  bodily  form 
on  earth,  in  order  to  deliver  the  good  from 
their  enemies,  and  destroy  sinners,  instead  of 
saving  them.  Even  the  Nisld'alanh  Avatar^ 
still  expected,  is  likewise  foretold  as  to  come 
for  the  destruction  of  sinners.  Thus  in  no  in- 
stance has  the  Hindoo  doctrine  of  incarnation, 
any  more  than  have  their  modern  sacrificial 
rites,  any  connection  with  the  salvation  of  sin- 
ners from  their  sins  ;  while,  it  should  be  added, 
the  Shaivites  or  worshipers  of  Shiva,  deny  the 
doctrine  of  incarnation  altogether. 

In  connection  with  the  doctrine  of  salvation, 
Christianity  lays  great  stress  upon  union  with 
God  through  Jesus  Christ,  as  essential  to  sal- 
vation from  sin  and  to  holy  living ;  and,  so  far 
as  words  go,  the  expressions  which  are  used  in 
many  Hindoo  sacred  books  might  seem  to  teach 
the  same  thing.  Yoga,  or  union  with  the  Su- 
preme Being,  is  often  held  up  as  the  highest 
good,  in  language  which  sounds  like  much  in 
the  gospels  and  epistles.     But  in  this  matter 


78      Handhook  of  Comparative  Religion, 

again,  in  reality,  we  have  not  similarity,  but 
the  strongest  contrast.  For  the  union  with 
God  in  Christ  of  which  the  New  Testament 
writers  say  so  much,  does  not  involve  any  sup- 
pression of,  still  less  loss  of,  [)ersona]ity.  The 
believer,  tlu'ough  his  faith  mystically  united 
with  God  in  Christ,  is  still,  according  to  the 
New  Testament  teaching,  as  separate  and  dis- 
tinct from  God  as  ever  he  was.  But,  on  the 
contrary,  all  Hindoos  intend  by  yoga^  ''  union  " 
with  God,  the  exact  opposite ;  namely,  the  ut- 
ter loss  of  the  separate  personality  of  the 
devotee,  the  absolute  and  final  cessation  of  per- 
sonal existence,  through  absorption  in  Brahma, 
even  as  the  wave  becomes  lost  in  the  ocean. 

Finally,  to  complete  this  part  of  our  com- 
parison, it  must  be  added  that  whereas  Chris- 
tianity recognizes  no  waj  of  salvation  apart 
frQm„Ch]dst,  Hindooism  regards  no  man  as  ex- 
cluded from  the  final  possibility  of  imiUi,  on 
account  of  race  or  religion.  Some  will  no 
doubt  regard  this  as  a  point  wherein  the  Hin- 
doo teaching,  as  being  more  broad,  is  superior 
to  that  of  Jesus  Christ ;  but  the  vital  question, 
after  all,  is  not  which  is  the  broader,  but  which 
is  the  true  teaching.  Nor  can  we  credit  this 
belief  to  the  superiority  of  the  Hindoo  to  the 
Christian  in  charity ;  seeing  that  such  an  in- 


The  Doctrine  Begardiug  Salvation.      79 

ference  necessarily  follows  from  the  pantheism 
which  is  fundamental  to  the  modern  Hindoo 
religion. 

Turning  now  to  Buddhism,  we  meet  with  a 
doctrine  concerning  salvation  Avhich  is  even 
more  remote  from  Christianity  than  that  of 
Hindooism.  Salvation,  in  the  Buddhist  doc- 
trine, is  not  absorption  in  the  universal  Divine 
Essence,  as  in  Hindooism,  for  Buddhism  knows 
of  no  Supreme  Being,  whether  in  a  theistic  or 
pantheistic  sense.  Still  less  is  it  eternal  resi- 
dence in  heaven,  even  such  a  heaven  as  is  prom- 
ised to  the  faithful  Mussulman.  It  is  simply 
non-existence.  It  is  deliverance  from  that  ne- 
cessity of  repeated  rebirth  which  is  occasioned 
by  the  presence  of  tanhd  or  "  desire,"  and  is 
eternal  cessation  of  being.  This  is  nh^vdna  or 
tiihhdna  ;  ^  or,  to  be  more  precise, — since  a  lower 
grade  of  nirvdna  is  recognized, — it  \^  parinih- 
hdna^  the  supreme   nirvdna. 

I  am  well  aware  that  this  has  often  been 
denied  b}^  scholars  of  eminence  ;  but  it  is  hard 
to  resist  the  feeling — if  one  may  judge  some 
such  by  their  own  words — that  they  have  often 
been  determined  in  their  opinion  more  by  their 
western  ideas  as  to  the  highest  good,  than  by 
a  reference  to  the  plain  words  of  the  ancient 

•  Nibbana  is  the  Pali  form  of  the  Sanskrit  word  nirvana. 


80      Han'dhooh  of  Comparative  Religion, 

Buddhist  Scriptures.^  It  is  hard  to  see  how 
the  non-existence  of  him  ^yho  has  attained 
nirvana  could  be  more  categorically  affirmed 
than  by  the  words  attributed  to  the  Buddha  in 
the  Sutta  Nipdta ;  wherein  one  asking  infor- 
mation on  this  subject  is  answered  by  the  Bud- 
dha :  "  That  by  which  they  say '  He  is '  exists  for 
him  (the  delivered  or  saved  one)  no  longer."'^ 
No  less  explicit  are  the  Avords  in  another  part 
of  the  same  Sutta^  where  we  are  told  that  they 
"  who  perfectly  conceive  the  state  (of  nihhdna) 
.  .  .  are  completely  extinguished."^  So 
again  with  equal  explicitness,  we  read  in  the 
Vinaya  Pitaka^  "  By  the  destruction  of  thirst 
{tanhd\  Attachment  is  destroyed  ;  by  the  de- 
struction of  Attachment,  Existence  is  de- 
stroyed." 

And  indeed,  when  it  is  remembered  that  the 
idea  of  the  supreme  good  must  needs  be  deter- 
mined by  the  conception  one  may  have  of  the 
supreme  evil,  it  is  plain  that  granting  the  Bud- 
dhist postulates  constantly  reaffirmed,  that  the 
chief  evil  is  pain  or  sorrow,  and  that  sorrow  is 
a  necessary  and  inseparable  concomitant  of  ex- 
istence, then  salvation,  at  least  in  its  strict  and 

'See,  e.  g.,  the  language  used  by  Sir  Edwin  Arnold,  in  the  Pref- 
ace to  his  Light  of  Asia;  also  the  words  used  by  Professor  Max 
iliiller,  Science  of'Relioion,  p.  140. 

"See  Sutta  Niputo  ;  Pdrai/anavaf/ffn,  vii.  4-8. 

^Ib.  Dvayatanii2yassana  Sutta,  42. ' 


The  Doctrine  Begarding  Salvation.      81 

highest  sense,  mitst  consist  in  the  extinction  of 
existence.  ^ 

It  is  however  true  that  nirvana  is  also  rep- 
resented in  a  different  way  in  the  Buddhist 
authorities;  namely,   as  the  attainment  of  a 
certain  ethical  state  and  temper  of  mind  and 
character;  something,  moreover,  which  is  or 
may  be  reached  in  this  present  life.     We  read, 
for'  instance :     "  The   destruction   of  passion,  | 
and  of  wish  for  the  dear  objects  which  have  ! 
been  perceived,  O  Hemaka,  is  the  imperishable  / 
state  of  nirvdna:'  ^    Here  then  we  meet  with  • 
a  conception  of  salvation  which  in  so  far  agrees 

» Quite  recently,  Dr.  Paul  Carusjn  The  Ji"on/s^  has  reiterated 
the  denial  that  'nirvana  consists  in  tlie  extinction  of  existence. 
But  I  find  in  his  article  nothing  whicli  sliould  constrain  one  to  l)e- 
lieve  that  such  eminent  specialists  in  liiuldliist  doctrine  as  Cliild- 
ers  Oldenberg.  Rhys  Davids. and  others,  are  mistaken  in  this  mat- 
ter' He  argues  his  iiosition  from  a  passa^^e  in  the  Samyntta 
Nikaiicu  wherein  apparently,  if  it  be  understood  according  to  our 
western  ideas,  the  continued  existence  of  him  who  has  attained 
nirvana  might  seem  to  l)e  taught.  But  Dr.  <"arus'  own  interpreta- 
tion seems  to  lead  to  the  very  conclusion  which  we  maintain.  For 
we  are  told  that  all  the  constituents  of  man  are  "transitory,"  and 
therefore  "cannot  be  regarded  as  his  .  .  .  enduring  self." 
But  if  so,  then  if  all  the  constituents  of  the  man  who  has  attained 
nirvana  are  gone,  how  can  the  man  himself  be  still  regarded  as 
existing?  Dr.  Cams  illustrates  what  he  regards  as  the  correct 
understanding  of  this  matter  by  a  quotation  from  the  Visuddhi 
Maaga.  which  he  takes  to  imply  his  own  view  of  the  nature  of  mr- 
valid.    Thus  : 

'•Misery  only  doth  exist,  none  miserable. 
No  (loVr  is  there,  naueht  save  the  deed  is  found. 
Nirvana  /.s,  but  not  the  man  who  seeks  it: 
The  Path  exists,  but  not  the  traveler  cm  It." 

But  these  words  will  seem  to  most  of  us  as  only  a  paradoxical  ex- 
presshm  of  the  most  extreme  nihilism.  The  substance  is  perished, 
but  its  attributes  remain  !  The  deed  remains,  but  not  the  doer  ! 
To  attempt  to  distinguish  such  a  condition  from  what  in  ordinary 
language  we  call  non-existence,  seems  to  be  a  mere  waste  of 
words.  See  The  MoniM.  ,Jan.  1897,  pi).  265,  266. 
'^Sulta  Nipdta  ;  Parayanavagga,  ix.  3. 


82      Handbook  of  Comparative   Religion. 

with  that  of  Christianity  that  it  is  made  to  con- 
sist in  the  attainment  of  a  certain  type  of  char- 
acter ;  a  type,  moreover,  which  is  characterized 
by  the  extinction  of  sin.  But  when  we  recall 
to  mind  what  has  been  set  forth  in  the  previous 
chapter  as  to  the  Buddhist  idea  of  sin,  it  is 
plain  that  the  resemblance  herein  between  this 
conception  of  the  nature  of  salvation  and  that 
which  is  presented  in  Christianity,  is  wholly 
superficial  and  unreal.  For  sin  is  one  thing  in 
Christianity,  quite  another  in  Buddhism.  It 
is  true  enough  that  certain  things  regarded 
as  sinful  by  the  Buddhist,  are  held  to  be  sin 
also  by  the  Christian ;  but  many  other  things 
are  held  to  be  sin  by  the  Buddhist,  which  ac- 
cording to  the  gospel  are  not  sin  ;  so  that  it  is 
very  clear  that  the  standard  by  which  an  ac- 
tion or  moral  state  was  judged  by  the  Buddha 
to  be  sinful  or  otherwise,  w^as  very  different 
from  that  which  determines  this  in  Christianity. 
Hence  nirvana^  even  if  considered  in  its  (lower) 
sense  of  deliverance  from  sin,  is  something  very 
different  from  the  salvation  of  the  gospel. 
The  Buddhist  w^ho  is  regarded  as  in  this  sense 
a  saved  man,  is  not  merely  a  man  who  has 
ceased  to  hate,  but  who  has  ceased  also  to  love ; 
who  has  not  only  ceased  to  desire  evil,  but  also 
to  desire  good  j  and  who,  if  delivered  from  the 


The  Doctrine  Regarding  Salvation.      83 

desire  of  long  life  in  this  sinful  world,  is  equally 
delivered  from  any  desire  to  go  to  heaven ! 
Assuredly,  this  ideal  of  salvation  is  only  one 
less  degree  removed  from  that  of  the  gospel, 
than  that  of  absolute  annihilation. 

Again,  it  is  also  true,  that  the  common 
people,  in  Buddhist  lands  often  conceive  of 
salvation  as  consisting  in  a  residence  after 
death  in  a  place  of  blessedness ;  and  for  this 
view  also  texts  can  be  quoted  from  the  Bud- 
dhist Scriptures.  Thus,  we  read  :  "  Evil  doers 
go  to  hell ;  righteous  people  go  to  heaven." 
But  it  is  immediately  added  in  this  text  from 
the  DJiammapada, — as  if  to  caution  any  one 
from  supposing  that  in  its  highest  sense  this 
is  salvation — "  those  who  are  free  from  all 
worldly  desires  "  (/.  ^.,  from  all  desire  for  any- 
thing, either  good  or  evil  in  this  world)  "  at- 
tain nirvana?''  ^ 

Furthermore,  the  Buddhist  heaven  is  not  a 
place  of  eternal  abode.  No  one  can  stay  there 
forever.  To  suppose  this,  were  to  contradict 
directly  the  fundamental  postulate  of  the 
whole  Buddhist  system,  that  there  is  no  per- 
manence any^where  in  anything,  either  good 
or  evil. 

Again,  whereas  the  teaching  of  Christ  was 

'  Dhammapada,  126, 


84      Handbook  of  Coin^arative  Religion, 

that  no  man  ever  has  saved  or  can  save  him- 
self, and  that  the  sole  author  of  salvation  is 
God  Himself  in  Christ,  the  Buddha  taught, 
and  that  with  emphasis,  the  exact  opposite, 
that  every  man  must  be  his  own  saviour.  It 
is  written : 

*'  By  one's  self  the  evil  is  done ;  l)y  one's  self 
one  suffers ;  by  one's  self  evil  is  left  undone ; 
by  one's  self  one  is  purified.  Lo,  no  man  can 
purify  another."  * 

In  nothing  is  the  contrast  between  Bud- 
dhism and  Christianity  more  marked  than  just 
at  this  point.  The  teaching  of  the  gospel  is 
that  God  became  man  to  save  man :  that  of 
Buddhism  is,  in  effect,  that  man  may  make 
himself  God,  thereby  saving  himself.  The  one 
teaches  a  Divine  self-humiliation  to  save  sin- 
ful man,  the  other  a  human  self -exaltation 
whereby  the  man  may  save  himself. 

One  can  scarcely  speak  of  a  "  ground "  of 
salvation,  when  speaking  of  the  Buddhist  sal- 
vation ;  for  this  phrase  implies  a  superior 
Power  who  accepts  or  rejects  a  man  on  ac- 
count of  certain  things  done  or  suffered  by 
himself  or  another,  whereas  Buddhism  knows 
nothing  of  any  such  Power.  It  is  taught, 
however,  that  the  means  whereby  one  may 

'  Dhammapada,  165. 


Tke  Doctrine   Reyannny  Salvation.      85 

attain  to  salvation  is  the  practice  of  certain 
good  works.  Not  that  there  is  any  superior 
I'ower  which  will  reward  the  doer ;  but  there 
is  a  certain  necessary,  though  non-moral,  nexus 
between  certain  deeds  or  acts  and  certain  re- 
sults, which  insures  that,  given  certain  acts,  a 
certain  result  will  follow.  But  the  reason  of 
this  is  not  judicial  or  legal,  but  purely  physical, 
like  that  in  virtue  of  which  the  planting  of  a 
certain  seed  insures  the  appearance  of  a  certain 
kind  of  plant. 

As  for  the  means  whereby  one  may  secure 
salvation,  the  biblical  statements  are  plain  that 
the  sinner  obtains  salvation  by  means  of  faith  ; 
that  is,  by  trust  in  a  crucified,  but  now  risen 
and  living,  Saviour,  Jesus  Christ  the  Lord,  and 
in  virtue  of  His  atoning  death.  The  Buddha, 
on  the  contrary,  taught  that  salvation  is  to  be 
obtained  by  following  the  "  Xoble  Eightfold 
Path."  From  the  standpoint  of  the  southern 
and  orthodox  Buddhism,  to  speak  of  trust  in 
the  Buddha  were  absurd  ;  for  having  attained 
the  ineffable  nirvdna,  he  is  now  infinitely  be- 
yond reach.  The  '' Xoble  Eightfold  Path" 
is  declared  by  the  Buddha  to  be : — Eight 
views ;  Eight  aspirations ;  Eight  speech  ;  Eight 
conduct ;  Eight  livelihood  ;  Eight  effort ;  Eight 
mindfulness  ;  and  Eight  contemplation.     Even 


86      Handhooh  of  Comjjarative  Religion. 

were  we  to  assume  that  these  several  phrases 
mean  what  the  words  naturally  suggest  to  any 
one  brought  up  in  a  Christian  land,  it  would 
be  plain  that  the  Buddhist  doctrine  of  salva- 
tion, as  contrasted  with  the  Christian,  teaches 
instead  of  salvation  by  trust  in  another,  salva- 
tion by  one's  own  works,  in  a  word,  by  right- 
ness  of  life.  Even  so,  the  two  doctrines  are 
antagonistic, — if  one  is  true,  the  other  is  false. 
But  the  divergence  is  far  greater  than  this. 
For  the  Buddha  did  not  intend  to  teach  by 
these  words  merely  salvation  by  moral  and 
upright  living,  such  as  is  the  trust  of  so  many 
in  Christian  lands ;  he  meant  something  wholly 
different.  For  Avhat  these  words  may  mean, 
manifestly  depends  upon  what  is  regarded  as 
the  standard  of  right ness ;  which  in  this  case 
is  one  nowhere  recognized  in  Christendom. 
For  instance,  when  "  right  views  "  are  enjoined 
as  fundamental  to  all  the  rightness,  by  this  it 
is  meant  that  he  wlio  would  be  saved,  must 
hold  those  views  of  life  which  are  set  forth  in 
what  are  known  as  "  the  Four  ]S"oble  Truths," 
namely:  that  existence  of  necessity  involves 
sorrow  ;  that  this  sorrow  is  caused  by  desire ; 
that  the  extinction  of  sorrow,  which  is  the 
object  of  the  doctrine  of  salvation,  is  therefore 
to  be  attained  through  the  extinction  of  all 


Tht  Don  trine  Regarding  Salvation.      87 

desire ;  and,  finally,  that  this  extinction  of 
desire  will  be  brought  about  by  walking  in 
the  above  described  "  Noble  Eightfold  Path." 
These  are  the  "  right  views,"  the  adoption  of 
which  is  the  first  step  in  the  "  Noble  Eightfold 
Path  "  which  conducts  to  nirvana.  Similarly, 
the  "  right  aims "  are  described  as  ^'  such  as 
tend  to  the  renouncing  of  the  world."  But 
this  phrase  is  not  intended  in  the  ordinary 
ethical  sense  as  understood  by  Protestants ; 
but  in  the  most  extreme  monastic  sense.  By 
''  rightness  of  livelihood,"  again,  as  another  of 
these  means  of  salvation,  it  is  intended  that  a 
man  shall  gain  his  livelihood  in  such  a  Avay  as 
shall  injure  no  living  being.  It  is  taught,  for 
example,  that  the  emplo^^ment  of  a  hunter,  or 
a  fisherman,  or  a  butcher,  is  incompatible  with 
walk  in  the  "  Noble  Eightfold  Path  "  ;  and  if 
consistent,  the  Buddhist  would  also  have  to 
say  that  the  employment  of  a  doctor  com- 
monly involves  sin  ;  because,  by  giving  quinine 
to  a  patient  suffering  with  intermittent  fever, 
he  thereby  destroys  that  low  form  of  animal 
life  the  presence  of  which  in  the  circulation 
causes  the  chill  and  fever ! 

Such  is  the  means  of  salvation  as  set  forth 
in  the  canonical  books  of  orthodox  Buddhism 
as  held   in   Ceylon,  Burmah,  and  Siam.     In 


88      Handhooh  of  Comparati've  Religion. 

Thibet,  China,  and  Japan,  however,  Buddhism 
has  become  greatly  modified,  and  therewith 
especially  its  doctrine  as  to  the  means  of  sal- 
vation. The  northern  Buddhists  believe  that 
a  Buddha  yet  to  be  born  on  earth  is  at  present 
living  somewhere  in  the  heavens ;  and  this 
imaginary  being,  called  the  Bodhisat,  is  prac- 
tically regarded  as  a  God  to  w^hom  men  in 
their  need  may  pray  and  look  for  help.  xVnd 
so  it  has  come  about  that  in  consequence  of 
that  ineradicable  sense  of  the  need  of  a  Saviour, 
which  the  orthodox  Buddhism  utterly  refuses 
to  satisfy,  man  has  evolved  for  himself,  in  the 
northern  Buddhism,  a  doctrine  of  salvation 
which  bears  a  considerable  resemblance  to 
the  Christian  doctrine.  Xot  Christ,  but  the 
heavenl}^  Bodhisat^  the  so-called  Amitaha  Bud- 
dhuy  is  the  object  of  faith.  He  is  supposed 
through  countless  bygone  ages  to  have  been 
accumulating  for  himself  an  infinite  stock  of 
merit ;  and  it  is  believed  that  when  a  man  puts 
his  faith  in  this  imaginary  being,  all  of 
Amitaba's  merit  is,  as  it  were,  transferred  to 
him ;  and  so,  released  now  from  the  necessity 
of  continued  rebirth  into  this  world  of  pain 
and  sorrow,  the  believer  is  at  death  received 
into  a  heaven  of  everlasting  blessedness.  It 
has  with  reason  been  remarked  :     "  It  is  very 


Th<i  Doctrine  Regarding  Salvation.      89 

remarkable  that  Buddhism,  beginning  in  sheer 
atheism,  should  finally  have  reached  the  very 
threshold  of  Christianity,  without  the  Christ. 
No  other  false  system  has  ever  paid  so  marked 
a  tribute,  though  involuntary,  to  the  funda- 
mental doctrines  of  Christianity."  ^ 

As  for  Confucianism,  it  cannot  be  said  to 
have  a  doctrine  of  salvation.  Confucius  con- 
cerned himself  exclusively  with  this  present 
life ;  and,  ignoring  God  and  our  relation  to 
Him,  and  with  this  the  future  and  unseen 
world,  he  had  no  place  for  any  teaching  as  to 
the  saving  of  sinners.  The  question  does  not 
even  seem  to  have  been  within  his  horizon. 

Taouism  long  ago  borrowed  from  Buddhism 
the  doctrine  of  transmigration  of  souls,  and 
appears  to  teach  that  the  deliverance  of  man 
from  evil  is  brought  about  through  various 
purgatorial  sufferings.  If  these  fail  to  bring 
about  a  man's  moral  improvement,  he  is  then 
consigned  to  endless  torment  in  hell.  But  so 
inadequately  have  both  Confucianism  and 
Taouism  dealt  with  the  question  of  what  a 
sinner  must  do  to  be  saved,  that  practically, 
the  Chinese  have  fallen  back  for  a  doctrine  of 
salvation,  on  a  Buddhism  of  the  type  just  ex- 
plained. 

'  Encyclopcedia  of  Missions,  vol.  I.,  p.  212. 


CHAPTEK  YI. 

THE   DOCTEINE    C01SrCER:N^ING   THE  FUTURE. 

Of  importance  fully  equal  to  the  fascination 
which  it  has  had  for  the  greatest  minds  in  all 
ages,  is  the  question,  What  shall  the  end  be  ? 
This  question  comprehends  two  questions: 
first,  What  is  the  final  destiny  of  the  individual 
man  ?  and,  second.  What  is  the  destiny  of  this 
world  of  men  as  a  collective  organism  ? 

In  answer  to  the  first  of  these  two  questions, 
the  gospel  of  Christ  assures  us  that  death  does 
not  end  all ;  that  the  soul  of  man  is  immortal, 
so  that  man  will  live  forever,  as  a  self-con- 
scious personality ;  and  moreover  that  there 
shall  yet  be,  at  a  time  unknown  to  all  but  God, 
a  resurrection  to  bodily  life  of  all  the  dead,  in 
order  that  they  may  be  judged  according  to 
their  works.  It  further  teaches  that  until  the 
day  of  resurrection  the  souls  of  all  penitent  and 
obedient  believers  in  God,  and — whenever  and 
wherever  revealed — in  His  Son  Jesus  Christ, 
when  they  die,  "  depart  to  be  with  Christ " ; 
and  that  if  their  blessedness  in  this  disem- 
90 


The  Doctt'ine  Coiieenilny  the  Fttture.      91 

bodied  state  be  not  yet  complete,  their  condi- 
tion is  yet  "  very  far  better  "  than  in  this  pres- 
ent life.^ 

It  is  taught,  on  the  other  hand,  that  the  souls 
of  the  departed  ungodly  and  wicked — to  use 
the  words  employed  by  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
Himself,  concerning  the  rich  man  who  died — 
are  "in  torment";  which  He  Himself  also 
chose  to  illustrate  by  the  image  of  fire  and  ex- 
treme thirst.'^ 

AYith  regard  to  that  period  called  "  the  day 
of  judgment,"  it  is  taught  that  "  all  that  are 
in  the  tom])s  shall  hear  His  [Christ's]  voice, 
and  shall  come  forth ;  they  that  have  done 
good  unto  the  resurrection  of  life,  and  they 
that  have  done  ill  unto  the  resurrection 
of  judgment."^  In  that  day,  we  are  told, 
every  man  shall  be  rewarded  according  to  his 
works ;  ^  that  as  for  believers,  while  their  ac- 
ceptance before  God  on  the  ground  of  Christ's 
atonement  is  the  sole  reason  for  their  exemp- 
tion from  that  "  indignation  and  wrath,  tribu- 
lation and  anguish  "  which  shall  overtake  the 
ungodly,'  so  that  they  are  saved  merely 
through  the  grace  of  God;  yet  their  reward 
shall  be  strictly  according  to  their  works;  one 

•  Phil.  I.  23.    (R.  V.)  "  Luke  xvl.  23.  24. 

'John  V.  28,  29.    (r.  v.)  ' Matt.  xvi.  27,  and  N.  T.  passim. 

»Rom.  ii.  8,  9. 


92      Handbook  of  Cohiparative  Religion. 

shall  rule  over  five,  another  over  ten  cities ;  ■ 
while  the  work  of  others  which  they  av rough t 
in  the  days  of  their  earthly  life  "  shall  be 
burned,"  so  that,  although  they  themselves 
shall  be  saved,  it  sliall  vet  be  as  "throuirh 
hre."  - 

In  like  manner,  it  was  taught  by  Jesus 
C'hrist  that  there  will  be  great  differences  in 
tiie  severity  of  the  punishment  of  the  finally 
impenitent  and  condemned.  The  servant  that 
knew  his  master's  will  and  did  it  not,  shall  be 
beaten  "  with  many  stripes  " ;  while  he  that 
knew  not  his  master's  will  and  did  it  not,  shall 
be  beaten  ''  with  few  stripes."  ^  And,  according 
to  the  teaching  of  the  Scriptures,  as  under- 
stood by  the  great  majority  of  Christians  in 
all  ages,  not  only  the  I'eward  of  the  righteous, 
but  also  the  retribution  of  the  ungodl}^  w^ill  be 
eternal.  Eegarding  this  matter  the  Lord 
Jesus  used  these  most  explicit  words :  "  These '' 
— ?*.  <?.,  those  just  mentioned  who  had  failed  in 
the  law  of  love — ''shall  go  away  into  eternal 
punishment :  but  the  righteous  into  eternal 
life."  ' 

It  is  of  the  greatest  importance  to  observe, 
in    comparing    Christian    with    non-Christian 


Luke  xlx.  17,  18.  n  Cor.  Hi.  15.    (r.  v.) 

"  46  (K.  v.). 


'  Luke  xil.  47.  *  Matt.  xxv. 


The  Doctrine  Concerning  the  Future.     93 

teaching  on  this  point,  that,  according  to 
Christian  doctrine,  in  this  final  fixation  of  the 
eternal  destiny  of  men,  there  is  nothing  arbi- 
traiy.  The  final  destiny  is  determined  by  the 
presence  or  absence  of  a  certain  type  of  moral 
cliaracter,  marked  by  purity  of  heart,  and  su- 
preme love  to  God.  That  the  salvation  of  the 
believer  is  always  said  to  be  of  grace,  does  not 
affect  this  fact :  for  the  Holy  Scriptures  every- 
where teach  that  the  grace  which  through 
atoning  blood  justifies  and  pardons  the  be- 
liever, does  this  in  oi-der  that  by  the  inwork- 
ing  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  teaching  of  the 
Word,  and  the  various  discipline  of  life,  the 
once  sinful  man  may  finally  come  to  be  without 
"spot,  or  wrinkle,  or  any  such  thing."  ^  Xor 
does  any  word  of  Scripture  ever  hint  that  any 
man  will  ever  be  visited  with  everlasting  pun- 
ishment in  whom  this  holiness  of  character  is 
found.  Such,  in  brief,  is  the  teaching  of  Chris- 
tianity, as  commonly  understood,  regarding 
the  ultimate  destiny  of  individual  men. 

As  regards  the  final  destiny  of  this  world, 
the  Scriptures  teach,  as  understood  by  all 
Christians,  that  whereas  now  sin  and  unright- 
eousness, and  ignorance  of  God,  prevail  more 
or  less  in  all  lands,  a  day  is  coming  in  which 

'  Eph.  V,  27. 


9-1:      Hmidhook  of  Compavatvve  Eelujlon, 

all  this  shall  be  reversed ;  "  the  earth  shall  be 
full  of  the  knowledge  of  the  Lord,  as  the 
waters  cover  the  sea,"  ^  and  "all  nations  shall 
serve"  and  obey  the  Christ  of  God. '^  They 
also  teach  that  in  that  day  of  judgment  wliich 
brings  in  the  resurrection  and  reward  of  the 
righteous  and  the  wicked,  this  material  earth 
in  which  we  live  shall  be  burned  with  fire.^ 
But  the  same  apostle  who  speaks  most  fully  on 
this  subject,  hastens  to  add  that  the  result  of 
these  last  fires,  shall  be,  not  the  annihilation 
of  the  planet  as  a  habitable  globe,  but  the  ap- 
pearance of  "  a  new  earth,  wherein  dwelleth 
righteousness."  *  And  the  sacred  record  closes 
Avith  a  picture  full  of  mysterious  glory,  in 
which  it  is  no  doubt  hard  to  say  how  much 
is  to  be  taken  as  literal,  and  how  much  as 
figurative,  but  in  which  this  at  least  seems 
clearly  to  appear  as  the  issue  of  human  his- 
tory :  namely,  a  new  heaven  and  a  new  earth, 
from  which  all  that  is  impure  and  unholy  shall 
be  forever  excluded,  and  whose  blessed  inhab- 
itants shall  live  in  the  immediate  vision  and 
fellowship  of  their  God  and  Father  to  all  eter- 
nity.' Such,  in  a  very  general  way,  is  the 
teaching   of   Christianity  concerning  the  last 

*Is.  xi.  9.  '^Ps.  Ixxll.ll. 

^2Pet.  lil.7, 10.  * 2  Pet.  m.  13. 

'Rev.  xxl.  1-8;  xxli.  1-6.  * 


The  Doctr'ine  Concerni mf  the  Future.     95 

things,  as  understood  by  the  majority  of  Chris- 
tian people. 

As  Islam  has  drawn  so  largely  from  the 
Christian  and  Jewish  Scriptures,  we  find  in  its 
eschatology  much  that  is  in  agreement  with 
these,  though  still  more  derived  from  the  fan- 
cies of  rabbinical  traditions.  Like  the  Chris- 
tian Scriptures,  the  Quran  teaches,  or  rather 
assumes,  the  immortality  of  the  soul  of  man, 
and  the  persistence  forever  of  self-conscious- 
ness and  personality.  Like  Christianity,  Islam 
also  teaches  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  at  a 
certain  preordained  time,  unknown  to  all  but 
God,  and  the  eternal  existence  thereafter,  in  a 
form  of  bodily  life,  of  all  men  who  shall  have 
ever  lived.  Islam  adds,  however,  that  not 
only  men,  but  also  angels,  the  imaginary  be- 
ings called  jinns,  and  even  the  brutes,  shall 
have  part  in  the  resurrection.'  But  as  re- 
gards the  last  named,  it  is  taught  that  after 
having  been  thus  raised,  and  having  taken 
satisfaction  for  all  that  they  had  suffered,  and 
having  been  duly  punished  for  all  evil  done 
by  them,  their  bodies  shall  be  again  reduced 
to  dust.^ 

The  Mohammedan  religion  also  recognizes, 

'  Sura  vl.  avs?;  xvil.  52-54. 

-See  Sale's  Preliminary  Discourse  to  the  Quran. 


96     Handbook  of  Comparative  Religion, 

of  necessity,  an  intermediate  state  of  the  souls 
of  the  departed,  between  death  and  the  resur- 
rection. As  to  its  nature,  and  the  condition  of 
man  therein,  the  Quran  has  but  little  to  say ; 
though  traditions  of  sayings  attributed,  with 
more  or  less  reason,  to  Mohammed,  have  vari- 
ously supplied  the  deficiency.  It  is  taught  in 
the  Quran,  however,  that  the  angel  of  death 
separates  the  soul  from  the  body,  with  vio- 
lence in  the  case  of  the  wicked,  and  Avith  gen- 
tleness in  that  of  the  righteous.^  After  the 
corpse  is  placed  in  the  grave,  it  is  visited  by 
the  two  angels,  Munkir  and  Xakir,  who  ex- 
amine the  dead  man  as  to  his  religious  stand- 
ing. If  he  believe  in  the  lialima^  they  give 
him  no  further  trouble ;  but  if  he  be  an  unbe- 
liever, they  beat  him  cruelly  with  heavy 
clubs.^  When  this  examination  is  completed, 
the  soul  passes  into  Al  BarzaM^  the  Moham- 
medan Hades.^  Concerning  the  condition  of 
the  faithful  who  have  departed  this  life,  noth- 
ing in  the  Quran  is  in  higher  tone  than  Avhat 
is  said  of  those  who  had  fallen  in  battle  at 
Ohod : 

"Thou  shalt  in  no  wise  reckon  those  who 
have  been  slain  in  the  cause  of  God  as  dead ; 

'  Sura  xvi.  34,  35;  Ixxix.  1,  2.  '  Sura  xlvii.  29;  vili.52. 

^See  Sura  xxlii.  lul,  and  the  Rev.  Dr.  Wherry's  Note  thereon  in 
his  Commentary  on  the  Quran,  vol.  iii.,  p.  184. 


The  Doctrine  Concerning  the  Future.     97 

nay,  they  are  sustained  alive  with  their  Lord, 
rejoicing  for  what  God  of  His  favor  has 
granted  them ;  and  being  glad  for  those,  who, 
coming  after  them,  have  not  yet  overtaken 
them :  because  there  shall  no  fear  come  upon 
them,  neither  shall  they  be  grieved.  They  are 
filled  with  joy  for  the  favor  which  they  have 
received  from  God  and  His  bounty;  and  for 
that  God  suffereth  not  the  reward  of  the  faith- 
ful to  perish."  ^ 

But  Islam  has  not  been  content  with  this, 
and  the  various  traditions  accounted  authentic 
by  Mohammedans,  add  numerous  particulars 
as  to  the  state  of  the  dead,  most  of  which  are 
in  suggestive  contrast  with  the  I^ew  Testa- 
7nent  on  this  subject.  A  distinction  is  taught 
as  to  the  condition  of  disembodied  spirits.  The 
souls  of  prophets  are  admitted  at  once  into 
Paradise ;  those  of  the  martyrs  are  said  to  rest 
in  the  crops  of  green  birds  in  Paradise.  As  to 
the  souls  of  other  Mohammedans,  many  be- 
lieve them  to  linger  around  the  graves  where 
the  bodies  are  laid.  Others  teach  that  all 
dwell  in  the  lowest  heaven  with  Adam,  the 
righteous  on  his  right  hand,  and  the  wicked 
on  his  left ;  others,  again,  that  they  exist  under 
the  throne  of  God  in  the  form  of  white  birds, 

'  Sura  lil.  170-172 


98      Handbook  of  Comparatim  Religion. 

The  souls  of  the  wicked,  many  believe  to  be 
kept  in  durance  in  a  dungeon  in  the  lowest 
earth;  others  believe  that,  according  to  a 
tradition  imputed  to  Mohammed,  they  dwell 
under  the  jaw  of  Satan,  and  are  tormented  by 
him  until  the  resurrection. 
y  As  to  the  nature  of  the  resurrection,  it  is 
taught  that  faithful  Mohammedans  are  raised 
in  their  own  bodies,  in  various  degrees  of 
honor,  according  to  their  merit.  ^  Unbelievers, 
on  the  other  hand,  will  not  in  all  cases  be 
raised  in  their  own  bodies ;  some  will  be  raised 
in  the  form  of  apes,  others  as  swine,  others  as 
maimed  or  variously  distorted.^  Of  the  teach- 
ing of  the  Xew  Testament,  based  on  that  of 
our  Lord,  that  the  resurrection  body  shall  be 
a  spiritual  body,  such  that  "in  the  resurrec- 
tion .  .  .  [they]  neither  marry,  nor  are 
given  in  marriage,"^  there  is  not  a  trace  in  the 
Quran.  On  the  contrary,  all  the  descriptions, 
many  of  them  in  gross  language,  intimate  that 
the  body  shall  be  as  truly  an  animal  body  as 
this.  Believers  shall  not  only  be  delighted 
with  the  pleasures  of  the  palate,  but  shall  be 
capable  as  here  of  procreation  ;  and  for  their 

'Suraxxxvi.  54. 

''See,  for  a  detailed  account  of  the  teaching  of  the  Traditions  on 
this  whole  subject.  Sale's  Preliminary  Discourse  to  the  Quran, 
sec. Iv, 

» Luke  XX,  35. 


The  Doctrine  Concerning  the  Future.     99 

enjoyment  beautiful  houris  shall  be  assigned 
to  every  true  believer.^ 

The  resurrection  is  to  take  place  in  the  day 
of  judgment,  of  which  the  purpose  is  declared 
to  be  the  reward  of  all  according  to  their 
works.  Rightly  enough,  great  emphasis  is  laid 
on  the  certainty,  and  the  unspeakable  terror 
of  that  day.  Sura  Al  Haqqat  opens  with  the 
words :  "  The  infallible  !  the  infallible !  What 
is  the  infallible  ?  "  '^  To  which  the  answer  is 
given  that  it  is  the  announcement  of  this  great 
day  of  judgment.  The  day  is  said  in  the 
Quran  to  be  preceded  by  signs,  such  as  the 
splitting  of  the  moon,^  the  appearing  of  a 
great  and  awful  smoke ;  ^  to  which  the  author- 
ized traditions  add  many  more:  such  as  the 
appearing  of  a  portentous  beast  sixt\"  cubits 
high ;  great  distress  among  all  nations ;  the  de- 
cay of  the  faith ;  sunrise  in  the  west,  the  de- 
scent of  Jesus  from  heaven,  who  will  marry 
and  live  on  the  earth  for  fortv  years,'  kill 
antichrist,  etc.,  etc.  During  this  short  period 
of   His  sojourn,   the  earth  shall  enjoy  great 


'The  grossiiess  of  the  descrii)tions  of  these  sensual  enjoyments 
of  good  Mussulmans  in  Paradise,  which  are  found  in  the  "Quran,  is 
astounding.    See  (e.  gr.),  Suras  Iv.  41-78;  Ivii.  11-39;  Uvi.  12-22,  e? 

''Hence  the  name,  Al  Haqqat,  of  this  Sura. 

'Suraliv.  1.2. 

*Suraxliv.  9, 10. 

*Some  say,  twenty-four  years. 


100    Handhook  of  CornjKtrative  Religion. 

peace,  so  that  even  camels  and  sheep  shall  live 
with  lions  and  bears,  and  little  children  shall 
play  with  serpents.  Beasts  and  even  inanimate 
things  shall  use  articulate  speech ;  the  Imam 
Mahdi  shall  appear ;  the  moon  shall  be  eclipsed 
when  in  conjunction  with  the  sun ;  ^  etc.,  etc. 

As  to  the  adjudications  of  that  day,  it  is 
taught :  "  The  weighing  of  man's  actions  on 
that  day  shall  be  just ;  and  they  whose  bal- 
ances laden  Avith  their  good  works  shall  be 
heavy,  are  those  who  shall  be  happy ;  but 
those  whose  balances  shall  be  light,  are  those 
who  have  lost  their  souls."  These  "  shall  re- 
main in  hell  forever."  ^  Great  pliysical  con- 
vulsions shall  occur :  "  The  earth  shall  be  shaken 
with  a  violent  shock,  and  the  mountains  shall 
be  dashed  in  pieces,  and  shall  become  as  dust 
scattered  abroad.  And  ye  shall  be  separated 
into  three  distinct  classes :  The  companions  of 
the  right  hand — how  happy  shall  the  compan- 
ions of  the  right  hand  be !  And  the  companions 
of  the  left  hand — how  miserable  shall  the  com- 
panions of  the  left  hand  be !  And  those  who 
have  preceded  others  in  the  faith,  shall  pre- 
cede them  to  Paradise."^ 


'Siu-a  Ixxv.  8,  9.  See  Rale's  Preliminary  Discourse,  etc.,  seo.lv. 
In  whicli  seventeen  such  signs  are  enumerated. 
-Sni;is  vil.  8,  9;  xxiii.  104. 
^Suralvi.  4-10. 


The  Doctrine  Concerniuy  the  Future.    101 

The  duration  of  the  day  of  judgment  is  said 
in  one  place  to  be  "  the  twinkling  of  an  eye, 
or  even  more  quick  " ;  elsewhere,  a  thousand 
years,  and  again,  in  another  place,  fifty  thou- 
sand years.* 

The  issue  of  the  day  will  be  the  driving  of 
the  wicked  into  hell,  and  the  reception  of  the 
righteous  into  Paradise.^  According  to  the 
authoritative  "Traditions,"  all  will  have  to 
pass  the  bridge  Si  rat,  no  broader  than  a  hair, 
and  shar})ev  than  a  sword,  which  the  righteous 
shall  cross  safely,  while  the  unbelievers  shall 
fall  off  into  hell.^  It  should  be  added,  how- 
ever, that  Islam  teaches  that  wicked  Moham- 
medans will  have  to  expiate  their  sins  in  the 
hell  Q.2W^^  jahiuvnam  ;  but  that  finally  all, 
even  of  such  Mussulmans,  will  be  delivered, 
while,  on  the  other  hand,  no  one  who  was  not 
on  earth  a  true  Moslem,  will  ever  be  delivered 
from  the  torments  of  hell. 

In  nothing  is  there  a  greater  contrast  be- 
tween the  Christian  Scriptures  and  the  Mo- 
hammedan Quran  and  traditions,  than  in  the 
way  in  which  the  pains  of  hell  are  described. 
The  few  statements  in  the  Xew  Testament  are 
awful  indeed  ;  but  there  is  a  holy  reticence  on 

'  Suras  xvi.  79 :  xxxii.  4 :  Ixx.  4. 

*Sura  Ivi.  11-43,  et.  seq.:  also  ci.  6-9  etpnsmyi. 

»A  notion  probably  derived  from  the  Magians. 


102    Handbook  of  ComjjatuUive  Religion. 

the  subject,  and  always  an  undertone  of  yearn- 
ing pity  and  longing  for  the  salvation  of  all ; 
as  also  a  careful  justice  which  declares  that 
but  "few  stripes  "  shall  be  visited  on  him  who 
did  not  his  Master's  will  through  ignorance. 
l\\  terrible  contrast  with  this,  in  the  Quran  the 
tortures  to  be  inflicted  on  men  in  hell  are 
dwelt  upon  to  weariness,  and  with  a  gross- 
ness  of  detailed  description  and  an  utter  ab- 
sence of  any  trace  of  pity  that  any  must  so 
suffer.  Thus  we  read:  *' Yerily,  those  who 
disbelieve  our  signs,  we  Avill  cast  to  be  broiled 
in  hell-fire;  so  often  as  their  skins  shall  be 
well  burned,  we  will  give  them  other  skins  in 
exchange,  that  they  may  taste  the  sharper 
torment;  for  God  isAvise."^  "Transgressors 
shall  be  cast  into  hell  to  be  burned  ;  and  a 
wretched  couch  it  shall  be.  This  let  them 
taste,  to  Avit:  scalding  water  and  corruption 
flowing  from  the  bodies  of  the  damned."  For 
refreshment  they  shall  have  the  fruit  of  the 
tree  Al  Zaqqum,  which  is  described  as  a  "tree 
that  issueth  from  the  bottom  of  hell :  the  fruit 
thereof  resembleth  the  heads  of  devils,  and 
the  damned  shall  eat  the  same  and  shall  fill 
their  bellies  therewith,  and  there  shall  be  given 
them  a  mixture  of  filth  and  boiling  water  to 

'Sura  iv.  64. 


Tfu-  Doctrine  Concerning  the  Fxiture,  103 

drink :  and  af terAvards,  they  shall  return  into 
hell."  ^  Instead  of  a  justice  tempered  with  holy 
pity,  they  are  represented  as  taunted  in  their 
helpless  agony.  AVhen  the  unbelievers  shall 
be  cast  into  a  fire  "  furiously  raging  and  roar- 
ing; .  .  .  they  shall  call -for  death."  It 
shall  be  answered  them,  "  Call  not  this  day 
for  one  death,  but  call  for  many  deaths."  "  It 
shall  be  said  to  the  tormentors,  '  Take  him  and 
drag  him  into  the  midst  of  hell  and  pour  on 
his  head  the  torture  of  boiling  water,  saying. 
Taste  this !  for  thou  wast  that  mighty  and 
honorable  person.' "  '^ 

Equally  gross  are  the  descriptions  constantly 
recurring  in  the  Quran,  of  the  enjoyments  of 
Paradise.  The  ISTew  Testament  dwells  on  the 
spiritual  fellowship  Avith  God,  and  Avith  all  the 
earthly  imagery  that  is  employed,  never  once 
uses  an  image  which  could  suggest  an  evil 
thought.  Very  different  is  it  with  the  Quran. 
It  is  true  indeed,  that  now  and  then  is  found  a 
not  unworthy  description  of  heaven,  as :  "  They 
shall  be  introduced  into  gardens  of  perpetual 
abode ;  .  .  .  and  they  shall  say.  Praise  be 
to  God  who  hath  taken  sorrow  from  us.  Yer- 
ilj^  our  Lord  is  ready  to  forgive  the  sinners 
and  to  reward  the  obedient,  who  hath  caused 

'Sura  xxxvii.  60-66.  *Sura  xliv.  47-49. 


104    Handbook  of  Cotnjjarative  lieligion, 

us  to  take  up  our  rest  in  a  chvelling  of  perpet- 
ual stabilit}^  through  His  bounty,  wherein  shall 
no  labor  touch  us,  neither  shall  any  weariness 
affect  us."  ^ 

Far  more  frequent,  however,  are  such  de- 
scriptions of  the  pleasures  reserved  for  the 
faithful  as  the  following :  "  They  shall  repose 
on  couches  the  linings  of  which  shall  be  of 
thick  silk  interwoven  with  gold. 
Therein  shall  receive  them  beauteous  damsels 
refraining  their  eyes  from  beholding  any  be- 
sides their  spouses,  whom  no  man  shall  have 
deflowered  before  them."^  Elsewhere,  we 
read  concerning  "  the  companions  of  the  right 
hand "  :  "  They  shall  repose  themselves  on 
lofty  beds.  Yeril}^,  we  have  created  the  dam- 
sels of  Paradise  by  a  peculiar  creation :  and 
we  have  made  them  virgins,  beloved  by  their 
husbands,  of  equal  age  with  them,  for  the  de- 
light of  the  companions  of  the  right  hand."^ 

An  eternity  of  sensual  enjoyment — this  is 
the  heaven  set  forth  in  the  Quran  for  the  re- 
ward of  them  that  please  God,  as  the  passages 
are  naturally  interpreted  by  all  orthodox  ^lo- 
hammedan  interpreters. 

As  to  the  future  of  this  earth  and  the  world 


'  Sura  XXXV.  30-32.  'Sura  Iv.  66. 

«Siu-alvi.  33-37. 


Tlie  Doctrine  Concert  dug  the  Future.  105 

of  men,  Islam  holds  out  no  bright  prospect. 
Where  the  Holy  Scriptures  tell  of  the  coming 
and  permanent  triumph  of  the  kingdom  of 
God  on  earth,  of  this  Mohammed  seems  to 
have  known  nothing.  This  world  is  to  go  on, 
much  as  now,  in  all  its  evil,  until  the  break  of 
the  day  of  judgment.  The  traditions  indeed 
say  that  Jesus  will  come  again  into  the  world, 
and  continue  here  for  an  ordinary  lifetime, 
and  that  during  this  short  period  universal 
peace  and  harmony  will  prevail.  But  I  have 
never  fallen  in  witJi  a  Mohammedan  who 
seems  to  have  had  this  creed.  And  whereas 
after  the  liery  judgment  wherein  ''  the  earth 
and  the  works  that  are  therein  shall  be  burned 
up,"  the  ISTew  Testament  bids  us  anticipate 
"  new  heavens  and  a  new  earth,  wherein 
dwelleth  righteousness,"  ^  and  which  shall  en- 
dure forever;^  Islam  knows  nothing  of  this 
hope.  So  to  the  dark  enigma  of  human  history 
with  all  its  sin  and  suffering,  Islam  returns  no 
answer  and  offers  no  solution,  other  than  that 
the  ages  of  sin  and  agony  were  what  they  were 
simply  because  it  so  pleased  God,  who  willed 
that  the  hell  which  He  had  created  should  be 
filled.  All  is  because  of  a  horrible  caprice  of 
absolute  and  arbitrary  almightiness. 

'2Pet.  iii.l3.  "Is.  Ixvi,  22. 


1U6    Handbook  of  Comparative  Beliyion. 

To  all  this,  the  eschatology  of  Hindooism,  in 
every  form,  offers  a  great  contrast.  As  to 
the  future  of  individual  men,  whether,  as  the 
Xyayiks  believe,  the  souls  of  men  are  distinct 
from  each  other  and  from  God ;  or  whether, 
as  is  the  common  Yedantic  belief,  all  souls  are 
really  parts  of  the  Divine  essence,  all  agree 
that  the  soul  exists  eternally.  With  equal 
unanimity,  however,  is  denied  the  continuance 
of  personality.  The  transmigration  of  souls 
is  universally  believed ;  but  it  is  not  claimed 
that  either  the  recollection  of  past  forms  of 
existence  abides  in  the  present,  or  that  the 
memory  of  the  present  life  shall  survive  into 
the  next  stage  of  being. 

Hindooism  speaks  of  a  heaven  and  a  hell  to 
which  many  go,  but  these  are  by  no  means 
the  only  places  or  states  of  post-mortem  ex- 
istence. I  nuiy  after  death  assume  some 
heavenly  or  some  infernal  form,  in  one  of  the 
heavens  or  hells,  or  I  may  reappear  here  on 
earth,  in  the  form  either  of  a  human  being  or 
some  other  living  creature.  Even  though  one 
go  to  heaven  or  hell,  no  one  there  abides  for- 
ever. For  the  whole  Hindoo  theory  of  rewards 
and  punishments  is  based  on  a  system  of  salva- 
tion by  merit.  If  any  one  goes  to  hell,  or  is  born 
in  some  form  again  on  earth  or  in  the  highest 


Tlo    Doctrine  Conceruiny  the  Future.    lUT 

heavens,  this  state  of  being  will  endure  only 
until  the  amount  of  happiness  or  of  suffering 
which  is  the  necessary  fruit  of  his  works  here, 
shall  have  been  exhausted.     But  inasmuch  as 
in  each  new  state  of  being  new  actions,  good 
or  evil,  are  done,  this  necessitates  yet  another 
birth,  as  and  where  one's  merit  may  determine. 
Apart  from  the  interposed  effect  of  any  saving 
mode  of  religious  life,  this  continual  succession 
of  births  and  rebirths  is  supposed  to  go  on, 
until  the  transmigration  shall  have  been  re- 
peated unto  eighty-four  lakhs,  i.e.,  8,400,000 
times.     Hence  a  common  colloquialism  for  the 
attainment  of  salvation  is  "to  cut  short  the 
eighty-four."     After  this,  at  latest,  each  soul 
is  reabsorbed   into  the   unconscious  Brahma, 
even  as  a  wave  after  rolling  on  and  on  for 
months  is  at  last  reabsorbed  and  lost  in  the 
ocean  out  of  which  it  arose.     Obviously,  while 
this    eschatology,   in   its    steadfast   insistence 
upon  the  necessity  of  recompense  for  works 
good  or  evil,  seems  to  lay  stress  on  at  least 
one  ethical  element,  in  reality  it  deprives  tlie 
doctrine  of  the  hereafter  of  all  moral  character 
and  power.     For  evidently,  if  either  reward  or 
punishment  is  to  have  any  moral  effect  either 
on  myself  or  another,  I  must  recognize  myself, 
and  others  must  be  able  to  recognize  me,  as 


108    Handbook  of  Coniparatlve  Heliyion, 

the  self-same  person  who  in  this  life  did  that 
of  which  in  the  next  life  I  reap  the  fruit.  But 
the  doctrine  of  transmigration  does  not  con- 
template this.  No  one  pretends  to  have  such 
memory  of  those  deeds  of  a  previous  life,  be- 
cause of  which  he  enjoys  or  suffers  what  he 
does ;  nor  is  there  left  an}^  room  for  believing 
that  in  the  case  of  a  next  birth,  the  memory 
of  the  present  will  survive  the  change  called 
death. 

For  the  world  of  men  at  large,  or  for  the 
earth  in  which  we  live,  Hindooism  holds  forth 
no  more  hope  than  Islam.  The  history  of  the 
world  is  believed  to  be  divided  into  four  ages; 
Satya,  Dwapur,  Treta,  and  Kali.  Of  these  four 
each  in  succession  is  worse  than  that  which 
preceded  it,  till  now  has  come  the  Kali  Yug, 
which  is  the  worst  of  all,  and  which  will  be 
terminated  by  the  Mahapralaya,  or  "Great 
Catastrophe,"  in  which  the  world  of  men,  with 
the  earth  on  which  they  live,  shall  finally 
perish.  This  shall  no  doubt  be  succeeded  by 
another  world,  but  that  has  no  connection 
with  the  present,  and  so  far  as  anything  is 
taught  or  believed,  is  destined  to  have  no 
different  history.  Of  a  final  everlasting  tri- 
umph of  righteousness,  Hindooism,  like  Islam, 
knows  nothing. 


The  Doctrine  Concerning  the  Future.   109 

No  more  satisfactoiy  than  the  teaching  of 
Hindooism  is  that  of  Buddhism  regarding  the 
last  things.  What  is  fundamental  on  this 
point  has  been  of  necessity  anticipated,  and  a 
brief  recapitulation  will  suffice.  According 
to  orthodox  Buddhism,  for  the  individual  man 
there  is  no  future  life.  It  is  repeatedly  taught 
that  man  consists  of  merely  ndmarupa^ ''  name 
and  form."  He  is  merely  the  result  of  the 
combination  of  certain  skandhas ;  and  when 
these  are  separated  in  death,  nothing  of  the 
man  can  remain  any  more  than — to  use  the 
common  Buddhist  illustration— when  a  wagon 
is  taken  to  pieces  anything  of  the  wagon  can 
remain  except  the  mere  idea. 

Transmigration  is  held,  but  in  a  sense  dis- 
tinctly diiferent  from  that  of  Hindooism.  As 
according  to  the  original  teaching  of  the  Bud- 
dha, the  doctrine  of  an  abiding  soul  is  one  of 
"the  ten  heresies";  therefore,  there  is  not 
supposed  to  be  any  substantial  essence  w^hich 
passes  from  one  body  to  another.  The  con- 
nection between  this  body  and  that  which 
shall  follow  it,  is  therefore  not  physical,  but 
merely  ethical,  not  real,  but  ideal.  That  is, 
the  works  which  I  do,  necessitate  the  produc- 
tion after  my  death  of  another  body  in  which 
their  fruit  can  be  realized.     Hence,  to  speak 


110    Handbook  of  Comparative  Religion. 

with  accuracy,  this  is  not  so  much  a  transmi- 
gration of  souls,  as  a  transmigration  of  karmina 
action,  or  of  merit. 

Obviously  such  teaching  as  this  deprives  the 
doctrine  of  future  reward  and  punishment  of 
all  ethical  character  and  moral  power.  So  far 
as  a  man  is  concerned,  regarded  as  a  conscious 
responsible  person,  death  for  him  ends  all. 

But  as  already  remarked,  despite  the  clear 
teaching  of  the  Tripitaka,  this  doctrine  is  re- 
jected by  millions  of  Buddhists  to-day.  The 
masses  in  most  Buddhist  lands  believe  in  the 
transmigration  of  souls  in  the  same  sense  as 
the  Hindoos.  Like  them,  the}-  also  believe  in 
various  heavens  and  hells,  into  one  or  other  of 
which  any  one,  according  to  his  merit  or  de- 
merit, may  be  born.  But,  as  in  Hindooism,  so 
in  Buddhism,  even  as  thus  understood,  there  is 
no  eternal  heaven,  any  more  than  an  eternal 
hell.  1^0  matter  what  summits  of  celestial 
bliss  in  one  of  the  highest  heavens  a  man  may 
attain,  and  no  matter  how  many  ages  he  may 
live  there,  VA'hen  his  merit  is  exhausted,  which 
brought  and  kept  him  there,  he  must  again  be 
born,  in  heaven,  earth,  or  hell,  according  to 
his  deeds.  And  so  must  the  weary  sequence 
of  birth  and  death  go  on,  until  at  last,  per- 
chance, in  some  one  of  these  myriad  births,  by 


The  Doctrine  Concerning  the  Future.  Ill 

following  and  walking  steadfastly  in  the  '^  Ko- 
ble  Eightfold  Path,"  the  poor  soul  may  attain 
nirvana^  and  know  no  more  of  bliss  or  woe 
forever. 

This  supreme  attainment,  however,  we  are 
assured,  is  very  rarely  reached.  Theoretically, 
it  is  within  the  reach  of  every  man :  but,  in 
fact,  we  are  told  that  in  all  the  ages  only  two 
men  outside  the  monastic  order  have  ever  at- 
tained iKtriniljldna  ;  and,  even  of  the  monks, 
only  two  since  the  time  of  the  Buddha  have 
achieved  this  consummation. 

Buddhism  has  a  doctrine  of  the  future  of  the 
world  and  the  race  as  well  as  of  the  individual, 
but  it  is  by  no  means  cheerful  and  inspiring. 
Indeed,  granted  the  Buddha's  fundamental 
postulate  of  the  necessary  impermanence  of  all 
things,  and  the  necessary  evil  of  all  existence, 
a  cheerful  eschatology  is  impossible.  And  so 
Buddhism  teaches  that  from  the  time  of  the 
Buddha  onward  to  the  end,  the  tendency  of 
the  human  race,  religiously  considered,  will  be 
downward,  until  at  last,  the  state  of  things 
shall  have  become  so  very  bad,  as  to  necessi- 
tate the  appearing  upon  earth  of  another  Bud- 
dha again  to  preach  the  Wa3\  This  will  help  for 
a  time ;  but  soon  a  similar  retrogression  will  be- 
gin, and  the  same  dreary  history  shall  repeat 


112    Handhooh  of  Com.jparative  Religion, 

itself,  and  so  on  and  so  on,  for  no  one  knows 
how  long.  Of  an  unending  age  of  a  holy  hu- 
manity on  a  glorified  earth,  such  as  the  E"ew 
Testament  predicts,  there  is  not  a  suggestion 
in  orthodox  Buddhism. 

In  a  very  late  work,  however,  the  Saddhar- 
"tnajnindariha,  "  The  Lotus  of  the  Good  Law," 
which  can  scarcely  be  older  than  a.  d.  200, 
six  or  seven  hundred  years  after  the  Buddha, 
an  eschatology  is  set  forth,  which,  in  contrast 
with  the  above,  presents  an  outlook  more 
cheerful,  and  more  in  accord  with  the  biblical 
teaching.  In  this  book  it  is  represented  indeed 
tliat  the  process  of  moral  degeneration  will  go 
on  until  the  end  of  this  l-aJjKi  or  world-period, 
when  this  world  will  be  destroyed  by  fire, 
Mara,  the  Spirit  of  Evil,  having  been  destroyed 
previously.  Thereafter  will  appear  a  better 
world,  in  which  purity  and  righteousness  shall 
prevail.  Such  a  representation  is  of  much  in- 
terest, as  so  closely  agreeing  to  the  represen- 
tations of  the  [N'ew  Testament ;  but  it  can 
hardly  be  fairly  credited  to  Buddhism,  with 
the  original  doctrine  of  which  it  is  in  direct 
contradiction.  In  fact,  when  we  remember 
that  according  to  evidence  of  considerable 
weight,  the  gospel  w^as  preached  through  India 
already  before   this   book  was  written,  it   is 


The  Doctrine  Concerning  the  Future.  113 

scarcely  possible  not  to  believe  that  as  in  the 
Krishna  legend  of  Hindooism,  so  in  this  teach- 
ing, we  may  justly  trace  a  historical  connec- 
tion with  the  gospel  doctrine,  which,  before 
the  above  named  book  had  been  written,  had 
been  undoubtedly  preached  in  India. 

As  for  the  earth,  it  has  been  alread}^  noted 
that  Buddhism,  like  the  New  Testament,  pre- 
dicts a  future  destruction  of  this  earth  by  fire, 
and  the  appearing  thereafter  of  j^et  another 
earth.  But  this  teaching  diverges  widely  from 
that  of  the  New  Testament.  For  according 
to  the  latter,  the  new  earth,  though  material, 
is  not  to  be  like  this  present  earth,  but  in 
bright  contrast  with  this,  in  that  in  it  righteous- 
ness is  to  abide ;  whereas,  it  is  the  general 
Buddhist  teaching  that  the  earth  which  shall 
succeed  the  present,  shall  be  in  all  respects  like 
unto  this.  Sin  and  evil  shall  rule  in  that  earth 
as  in  this.  Man  shall  go  from  bad  to  worse ; 
from  time  to  time  a  new  Buddha  shall  appear 
to  preach  the  Way,  and  stay  for  a  little  the 
downward  course  of  men,  and  again  and  again 
shall  men  soon  forget  his  teaching,  and  go  on 
their  downward  way  as  before,  till  at  last  an- 
other world  catastrophe  shall  occur  as  before, 
and  thereafter  a  new  I'alpci  and  a  new  earth, 
in  which  the  whole  dismal  movement  shall  be 


114    Handbook  of  Conhjjarative   Religion. 

repeated.  And  so  shall  it  go  on,  for  all  that 
Buddhism  teaches  to  the  contrary,  forever  and 
forever. 

Such  is  the  teaching  of  Buddhism  regarding 
the  future,  whether  of  the  individual,  or  of  the 
earth  and  world  of  collective  humankind. 

From  what  has  been  before  said,  it  will  be 
clear  that  Confucianism  has  no  eschatologv. 
Confucius  concerned  himself  wholly  with  this 
world  and  with  our  life  here  and  now.  The 
questions  what  shall  be  after  death  for  the  in- 
dividual, or  to  what  consummation  the  history 
of  the  world  is  moving,  he  simply  ignored. 

Taouism  has  ventui'ed  more.  The  Taouists 
teach  that  each  man  has  three  souls,  one  of 
which  abides  with  the  dead  body,  another 
near  the  "spirit-tablet,"  while  another  is  suj)- 
posed  to  be  taken  to  purgatory,  where  it  is 
made  to  undergo  various  disciplinary  suifei-- 
ings ;  and  if  at  last,  after  all  the  transmigra- 
tions and  the  pains  of  purgatory,  the  sinner 
prove  irreformable,  he  is  sent  to  an  endless 
hell.  But  it  is  said  that  in  genei'al  these  post- 
mortem penalties  are  little  thought  of,  and  the 
penalties  attached  to  sin  in  "  The  Book  of  Re- 
wards" consist  merely  in  the  shortening  of 
the  sinner's  earthly  life.     It  should   be  said 


The  Doctrine  Concerning  the  Future.   115 

ho^vever  that  some  scholars,  like,  e.  g.^  Pro- 
fessor Douglas,  deny  that  the  doctrine  of  a 
heaven  and  a  hell  is  anj^  part  of  Taouism. 
As  to  the  future  course  of  human  history  on 
earth,  Taouism  is  as  silent  as  the  doctrine  of 
Confucius. 


CHAPTEK  VIL 

PRACTICAL  MORALS. 

The  moral  teachings  of  Christianity  are 
summed  up  in  the  Ten  Commandments,  as 
illustrated  and  explained  by  our  Lord.  As 
regards  our  duties  to  one  another,  all  is 
summed  up  in  the  words :  ^'  Whatsoever  ye 
would  that  men  should  do  to  you,  do  ye  even 
so  to  them."  And  lest  even  this  might  be  mis- 
interpreted into  a  merely  outward  regulation, 
concerning  external  acts  alone,  in  another  pas- 
sage our  Lord  has  laid  down  the  principle 
that  all  true  morality,  all  the  commandments 
of  God  regarding  our  duties  to  Himself,  and 
our  duties  to  each  other,  are  summed  up  in 
these  memorable  words :  *'  Thou  shalt  love 
the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  with 
all  thy  soul,  and  with  all  thy  strength,  and 
with  all  thy  mind ;  and  thy  neighbor  as  thy- 
self."^ 

From  this  it  follows  that  a  mere  external  keep- 
ing even  of  the  Ten  Commandments,  or  a  merely 

'  Luke  X.  27. 

116 


Practical  Morals.  .  117 

outward  observance  of  the  ordinances  of  re- 
ligion is  very  far  from  satisfying  the  moral 
ideal  set  before  us  in  the  gospel.  Hence,  we 
find  that  Christ  taught  that  even  the  feeling 
of  hatred  in  a  man's  heart,  in  God's  sight 
makes  him  a  murderer ;  and  the  indulgence  of 
the  lustful  look,  makes  a  man  in  God's  sight 
an  adulterer.  ^ 

It  is  again  most  characteristic  of  the  moral 
teaching  of  the  Xew  Testament,  that  stress  is 
everywhere  laid  rather  upon  principles  than 
on  the  literal  and  punctilious  observance  of  a 
multitude  of  minute  regulations.  Slavery  is 
not  prohibited  ;  Onesimus  is  even  by  an  in- 
spired apostle  commanded  to  go  back  to  his 
master,  nor  is  Philemon  commanded  to  eman- 
cipate him ;  and  yet  in  commanding  him  to 
treat  Onesimus  as  a  brother  beloved,  he  used 
words  which,  as  they  have  worked  on  through 
the  ages,  have  put  an  end  to  the  institution  of 
slavery  in  all  Christian  lands.  This  is  but 
a  single  instance  out  of  the  many  with  which 
history  is  filled,  that  show  with  more  than 
noonday  clearness  how  the  elevating  and  re- 
forming power  of  the  moral  teaching  of  Christ 
is  no  less  conspicuous  than  its  singular  purity 
and  nobility. 

'Matt.  V.  21.  12.  27. -'S. 


118    Handbook  of  Comparative  Religion. 

In  Mohammedanism,  we  may  readily  admit 
that  many  precepts  can  be  found,  as  indeed  in 
all  religions,  Avhich  are  in  full  accord  with  the 
law  of  the  gospel.  The  best  of  Islam  is  ex- 
pressed in  the  following  passage  in  the  Surat 
ul  Baqr : 

"  It  is  not  righteousness  that  ye  turn  your 
faces  in  prayer  toward  the  east  and  the  west ; 
but  righteousness  is  of  him  who  believeth  in 
God,  and  the  last  day,  and  the  angels,  and  the 
Scriptures,  and  the  prophets;  who  giveth 
money  for  God's  sake  unto  his  kindred,  and 
unto  orphans,  and  the  needy,  and  the  stranger, 
and  those  who  ask,  and  for  redemption  of  cap- 
tives ;  who  is  constant  at  prayer,  and  giveth 
alms ;  and  of  those  who  perform  their  cove- 
nant when  they  have  covenanted,  and  who  be- 
have themselves  patiently  in  adversity,  and 
hardships,  and  in  time  of  violence ;  these  are 
they  ^vho  are  true,  and  these  are  they  who  fear 
God.''  ^ 

To  refer  to  particulars,  willful  murder  is  pro- 
hibited in  the  Quran,  and  especially  infanti- 
cide ;  also  adultery,  theftj.and  taking  of  usury ; 
and  believers  are  directed  to  treat  with  kind- 
ness the  wives  whom  they  may  have.  Not 
only  drunkenness,  as  in  the  ISTew  Testament, 

^Suia  ii.  177. 


F  met  teal  MoraU.  119 

but  unlike  the  Xew  Testament,  all  use  of  wine 
is  absolutely  prohibited. 

All  this  and  much  more  is  well ;  but  now 
many  things  must  be  added  which  will  show 
how  very  much  lower  is  the  moral  standard 
of  the  Quran  than  that  of  the  gospel.  If  will- 
ful  murder  is  prohibited,  yet  it  is  commanded 
in  the/case  of  unbelieveTs  in  Mohammed,  who 
will  neither  accept\I.sUini  nor  pay  tribute,  and, 
in  particular,  in  the  case  of  every  Moslem  who 
may  embrace  another  religion.  In  Sura  ul 
Maida,  we  read  that  "the  recompense  of  those 
who  fight  against  God  and  His  apostle  shall 
be  that  they  shall  be  slain,  or  crucified,  or 
have  their  hands  and  feet  cut  off  on  opposite 
sides,  or  be  banished  the  land."  ^ 

Again,  theft  is  prohibited,  which  is  well ;  but 
for  this  the  cruell  punishment  is  said  to  be 
"'^appointed  by  God,"  that  both  of  "  the  hands 
of  the  thief  shall  be  cut  off."  ^  Slavery  is  not 
only  negatively  tolerated,  l)ut  is  coimnanded  ; 
in  that  the  Moslems  are  directed  to  make 
slaves  of  the  women  and  children  of  heathen, 
Jews,  and  Christians,  conquered  in  battle. 

It  is  urged  by  some,  however,  that  Moham- 
med at  least  ameliorated   slavery ;    and   this 


'  Sura  V.  87,    See  also  Suras  iv.  28;  ix.  5,  29. 
'Sura  V.42. 


120    Handbook  of  ComparoMve  Religion. 

claim  is  supported,  e,  g.,  by  the  fact  that  the 
prophet  said,  on  the  occasion  of  the  Farewell 
Pilgrimage :  "  See  that  ye  feed  your  slaves 
with  such  food  as  ye  eat  yourselves,  and  clothe 
them  with  the  stuff  ye  wear."  So  also  there 
is  avqualigeclj[)rohibition  of  prostitution  of  fe- 
male slaves,  thus  :  "  Compel  not  your  maid- 
servants to  prostitute  themselves,  if  they  be 
willing  to  live  chastely " ;  ^  and  in  the  same 
verse  it  is  said  to  be  an  act  of  merit  to  give 
slaves  "  of  the  riches  of  God,  which  He  hath 
given,"  in  order  to  help  them  to  redeem  them- 
selves from  slavery. 

Again,  the  law  was  given  i*egai'ding  slaves : 
"If  they  commit  a  fault  which  ye  incline  not 
to  forgive,  then  sell  them;  for  they  are  the 
servants  of  the  Lord,  and  are  not  to  l^e  tor- 
mented." ^ 

Nevertheless,  no  one  familiar  Avith  the  facts 
can  deny  that  up  to  this  present  time,  there  is 
no  indication  that  the  Mohammedan  world 
even  desires  to  give  up  the  institution  of 
slavery ;  and,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  Islam  is  di- 
rectly responsible  for  about  all   the  slavery 


»Snra  xxiv,  33. 

'^Mr.  Boswortli  Smith's  statement  that  Mohammed  laid  down  the 
principle  that  the  captive  wlio  embraced  Islam  sliould  l3e  ipso 
facto  free,  is  simply  incomprehensihle.  In  Surat  un  Nisa,  vs.  24, 
explicit  reference  is  made  to  snch  female  slaves  "as  are  true  be- 
lievers "  ;  nor  Is  this  a  solitary  reference  to  such  slaves. 


Practical  Morals.  121 

that  exists  in  the  woi'ld  to-day.  Moreover, 
that  slavery  throughout  the  Mohammedan 
world  is  of  an  exceptionally  cruel  and  debas- 
ing type,  as  witness  the  facts  of  the  African 
slave  trade  Avith  which  we  are  only  too  pain- 
fully familiar — "  the  open  sore  of  the  world." 

Especially  notorious  is  the  fact  that  under 
the  explicit  and  repeated  instruction  of  the 
Quran,  formally  authorizing  unlimited  concu- 
binage with  female  slaves,  slavery  has  been 
made  to  pander  to  all  the  basest  lusts.  For 
while  polygamy  was  autliorizecf7y^tTEe  num- 
ber of  wives  was  limited  to  four :  but  the  ap- 
parent limitation  on  sensuality  w^as  nullified 
by  the  explicit  declaration  in  the  Quran  that 
as  to  "the  carnal  knowledge  of  .  .  .  the 
slaves  which  their  right  hands  possess"  the 
good  Mussulman  "  shall  be  blameless."  ^ 

It  is  sometimes  urged,  in  comparing  Moham- 
medan with  Christian  social  morality,  that  as 
regards  the  sin  of  prostitutipn^^  the  case  is  not 
so  bad  in  Mohammedan  as  in  Christian  lands. 
After  living  for  many  years  in  a  land  where 
Mohammedanism  prevails,  the  writer  can  see 
nojideguate  ground  _f or  jyijssta^^^^  It  is 

true  that  the  form  under  which  licentiousness 
prevails,  may  in  some  places  be  modified ;  but 

'  Sura  Ixx.  29,  30. 


122     Ihuulbook  of  Compai'at'hoe  Religion. 

it  is  to  be  declared  Avith  emphasis  that  Mo- 
hammedanism  has  not  diminished  licentious 
ness,  but  increased  it.  Xot  only  so,  but  in 
Mohammedan  communities  it  appears  under 
fomis  more  revolting  than  anywhere  in  Chris- 
tendom. We  agree  entirely  with  the  strong- 
language  used  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Henry  Jessup, 
of  Beirut,  Syria,  who  has  said  :  "  In  these  days 
when  so  much  has  been  written  about  the 
high  ethical  tone  of  Islam,  we  shall  speak 
plainly  on  this  subject,  unpleasant  though  it 
is.  .  .  .  Polygamy  has  not  diminished  li- 
centiousness among  the  Mohammedans.  The 
sin  of  Sodom  is  so  common  among  them  as  to 
make  them  in  many  places  objects  of  dread  to 
their  neighbors.  The  burning  words  of  the 
apostle  Paul  in  Eom.  i.  24:-27,  are  applicable 
to  tens  of  thousands  in  Mohammedan  lands 
to-day.'' '  These  statements  are  substantially 
Avarranted  as  regards  the  state  of  society  in 
India  to-day.  It  is  here  generally  agreed  that 
in  respect  of  licentiousness,  the  Mohammedans 
of  India  compare  very  unfavorably  with  their 
Hindoo  neighbors. 

Ifjin  jthing.couldMcLta  Jh  e  debasement  of 
the  family  as  unalterably  determined  by  the 

*See  The  Mohaivmednn  Mis^sionary  Problem,  p.  46  et  seg. 
Also  comi)ave  tlie  remarks  of  the  llev.  Dr.  Wlierry,  in  his  Com- 
mentary  on  the  Quran,  Note  on  Sura  iv.  3,  in  vol.  ii.,  p.  69. 


Practiad  Morals.  128 

legislation  of  the  Quran,  it  is  found  in  the 
regulations  regaTdmg  divorce.  It  is  in  all 
Mohammedan  lands  permitted  to  a  man  to 
divorce  a  wife  merely  by  a  word,  and  for  no 
cause  but  a  caprice.  He  may  even  do  this 
twice,  and  take  her  back  again  ;  but  if  he  do 
this  a  third  thne,  then  he  cannot  take  her  back 
until  she  shall  previously  have  been  married 
and  cohabited  with  another  man,  who  may 
then  in  turn  divorce  her,  when  the  former 
husband  may  take  her  back  again. ^  And  in 
Moslem  lands,  such  marriages  of  temporary 
convenience  are  often  formally  arranged  to 
suit  the  wish  of  some  capricious  and  tyrannical 
husband.  In  a  word,  woman,  in  the  ethics  of 
the  Quran,  is  not  practically  ^j^egarded  as  a 
human  being,  but  as  an  aiiimal^  to  be  used 
merely  for  the  service  and  pleasure  of  her 
master ;  who,  while  he  is  charged  to  treat  her 
with  kindness,  is  yet  formally  invested  with 
unqualified  authority  to  beat  or  confine  her 
whenever  he  judge  her  to  be  perverse ;  and 
abandon  her  when  he  please.^  If  anything 
were  needed  to  the  stimulation  of  the  animal 
passions  by  the  moral  (?)  law  instituted  by 
Mohammed,  it  is  found  in  this,  that  whereas 

»  Sura  ii.  229,  230.    Compare  this  with  the  Old  Testament  view  of 
such  an  action  ;  .Ter.  iii.  1. 
'  Sura  iv.  33. 


124    Ilandhook  of  Com/parative   Reliyion. 

there  is  some  nominal  restriction  on  unbounded 
licentiousness  on  earthy  in  the  limitation  of  the 
numV)er  of  wives ;  the  pious  Moslem  is  taught 
that  when  he  shall  reach  Fara;dise,  all  restric- 
tion shall  be  removed,  and  the  faithful  are 
proiiiised  that  they  shall  delight  tliemselves 
with  thousands  of  beautiful  virgins.^ 

To  give  a  just  and  complete  account  of  the 
ethical  teachings  of  Hindooism  in  any  short 
space  is  impossible.  Xot  only  is  there  no  one 
authority  on  the  subject  to  which  one  might 
refer,  but  the  differences  in  moral  teaching  in 
different  forms  of  Hindooism  are  so  many  and 
great,  that  ^comparatively  few  statements  can 
be  jnade  of  universal  application.  To  repre- 
sent the  morality  of  Hindooism  by  the  un- 
natural orgies  of  the  Bam-margis  or  followei's 
of  the  Tantrik  Hindooism,  would  be  as  unfair 
as,  on  the  other  hand,  it  Avould  be  to  take  the 
often  lofty  morality  of  the  eclectic  Bhagavad 
Gita,  as  representing  the  average  moral  code 
of  the  millions  of  India. 

In  general,  one  may  say  that  not  a  few 
moral  duties  are  generally  recognized  and  the 
merit  of  observing  them  extolled.  The  dut^y 
of  children  to  honor  and  obey  their  parents, 

*  See  the  passages  from  the  Quran  cited  above,  pp.  98,  104. 


Practical  Morals,  125 

howsoever  often  neglected— as,  alas,  even  in 
Christian  lands— is  much  emphasized  by  all. 
Equableness  of  temper  is  enjoined  by  writers 
oT^every  school,  though   on  grounds  widely 
different   from   those   exhibited   in   the  Kew 
Testament.     Xeithei-  is  one  to  be  easily  ruffled 
by  provocations  or  by  trouble  of  any  kind,  nor, 
on  the  other  hand,  should  the  wise  man  be 
greatly  elated  by  what  is  pleasant  and  agree- 
able.    Truthfulness,  though  little  enough  ob- 
served by  mo«{  people,  is  in  theory  ranked  as 
avery  great  virtue.     The  greatest  stress  is  laid 
on  the  inviolability  of  the  marriage  relation ; 
and  one  may  well  "believe  that  the  women  of 
India  are  generally  loyal  to  their  husbands. 
Polygamy,  if  allowed,  is  not  extensively  prac- 
ticed ;  the  disloyalty  of  a  wife  is  regarded  with 
the  strongest  feelings  of  reprobation. 

^iLii^J^tlier^sLde.  however,  not  so  much 
can  be  said.  The  frequency"  of  violations  of 
the  seventh  commandnientTs  sadly  evidenced 
as  medical  friends  tell  us,  by  the  exceeding 
prevalence  of  the  disease  which  is  its  common 
penalty.  More  strikingly  suggestive  still  is 
the  fact  that  in  Hindi  there  is  no  word  an- 
sNvering  to  the  English  word  ''chaste,"  which 
can  possibly  be  applied  to  a  man.  The  only 
word  of  such  meaning  which  is  in  the  Ian- 


126    Ilandhook  of  Coinparative  Rernjion. 

guage,  can  only  be  used  of  a  woman.  Ob- 
scenity in  speech  i^  one  of  the  crying  sins  of 
tKe~  rand,  and  is  confined  to  no  class  or  sex. 
But  this  is  not  strange,  when  we  note  to  what 
an  extent  obscenity^  is  connected  with  Hindoo- 
isin.  In  the  Penal  Code  of  British  India,  in 
the  section  regarding  obscene  pictures,  carv- 
ings, etc.,  the  government  was  obliged,  out  of  a 
prudent  regard  to  the  feelings  of  the  people, 
to  enter  a  clause  to  the  effect  that  the  prohi- 
bition and  penalty  attached  was  not  to  be 
understood  as  applying  to  the  carvings  of 
temples  and  idol  cars,  etc. 

Nor  can  it  be  said  that  this  is  merely  char- 
acteristic of  the  modern  corrupt  Puranic  Hin- 
dooism.  In  the  course  of  a  quarrel  in  the 
Panjab  a  few  years  ago  between  the  oi'thodox 
Hindoos  and  the  Keformed  Hindoos  of  the 
Arya  Samaj,  wlio  insist  that  the  Hindoos 
ought  to  return  to  the  religion  of  the  Yedas, 
it  came  about  that  a  part  of  the  Sanskrit  text 
of  the  Yajur  Yeda  relating  to  the  Asvamedha,, 
or  Horse  Sacrifice,  of  ancient  times,  together 
with  the  Commentary  of  Mahidhar  upon  it, 
was  translated  into  the  vernacular  of  the 
people,  for  general  circulation.  A  complaint 
was  made  against  the  Aryas  for  an  alleged 
false  translation :   with  the  result  that  when 


Practicdl  Mo/'aIs\  127 

examined  by  Sanskrit  experts,  the  translation 
^yas  declared  accurate  ;  and  thereupon  the  gov- 
ernment, although  always  cautious  of  doing 
anything  to  offend  the  religious  prejudices  of 
the  natives,  to  the  dismay  of  the  Aryas,  pun- 
ished those  concerned  in  the  translation  and 
publication  of  this  part  of  the  Yeda,  as  having 
violated  the  law  against  obscene  literature! 
Writing  of  this  matter,  the  Kev.  T.  Williams, 
C.  M.  S.,  of  Eewari,  Panjab,  says,  in  the  Indian 
Evangelical  Bevieio ;  ^  "I  dare  not  give,  and 
you  dare  not  print,  the  ij^sissinia  verba  of  an 
English  version  of  the  original  Yajur  Yeda 
mantras.  .  .  .  Even  a  Latin  translation  of 
these  scandalous  mantras,  would  not,  I  im- 
agine, be  tolerated  in  a  newspaper." 

Yet _all  this  only  agrees  with  the  repre- 
sentation of  the  character  of  God  which  is 
given"  in  some  of  the  authoritative  "sacred 
books  '-of  the  Hindoos.  It  is  safe  to  say  that 
the  view  which  any  religion  gives  of  the  I)i^dne 
character  may  be  fairly  taken  as  indicating  the 
moral  standard  accepted  by  the  people  who 
follow  such  religion.  If  Hindooism  be  thus 
judged,  it  is  found  terribly  guilty.  It  is  indeed 
true  that  the  character  of  the  incarnation 
known  as  the  Kam  Avatar,  presents  many  at- 

'  Jan.,  1891. 


128    Handbook  of  Comjparative  Religion, 

tractive  features ;  but  Ram  is  by  no  means  free 
from  deceit  and  other  human  frailties ;  and  if 
the  character  of  Krishna  as  placed  before  us  in 
the  Bhagavad  Gita,  be  pure  from  sensuality, 
the  character  of  the  ^ame  supposed  incarna- 
tion as  presented,  e.  g.^  in  the  Bhagavat  Purana, 
is  distinguished  by  the  uttermost  licentiousness 
conceivable.  Eam  and  Krishna  present  tEe 
incarnations  of  Yishnu,  the  second  member  of 
the  Divine  Triad.  Many  however  adore  the 
Divine  ideal  as  presented  in  the  god  Shiva  or 
Mahadev,  the  third  member  of  the  Triad/  .In 
him,  that  ideal  is  represented  in  a  character 
which  combines  in  the  highest  degree  the  traits 
of  a  revolting  asceticism  and  of  unspeakable 
filthiness  and  cruelty.  What  then  must  be  the 
moral  ideals  of  the  mass  of  the  people,  who  be- 
lieve that  such  characters  as  these  are  worthy 
manifestations  of  the  Deity  ?  It  is  true  that 
in  one  of  the  Puranas,  readers  are  cautioned 
that  they  are  not  to  suppose  it  permissible  to 
ordinary  people  to  imitate  these  Divine  Beings 
in  such  things.  But  the  caution  is  not  care- 
fully observed  even  noAv,  and  in  earlier  days, 
when  English  law  was  not  supreme  in  India, 
far  less  than  in  these  times. 

Again,  in  contrast  with  practical  Christian 
ethics,  it  is  the  great  outstanding  fact  that  the 


Practical  Morals,  129 

system  of  caste,  alike  in  the  laws,  written  and 
unwritten,  ">  by  which  it  is  regulated,  and  in 
their  practical  application  in  the  India  of  to- 
day, is  nothing  less  than  the  formulated  rejec- 
tion of  the  fundamental  principle  of  morals 
laid  down  by  Christ,  "  Thou  shalt  love  thy 
neighbor  as  thyself."  How  merciless  has  been 
the  tyranny  which  the  Brahmans  of  India  have 
exercisecl  over  the  castes  below  them,  is  a  mat- 
ter of  common  knowledge  among  intelligent 
people.  It  may  be  added  that  the  members 
of  each  lower  caste,  taught  by  their  exam- 
ple, in  their  turn,  as  they  liave  opportunity, 
are  no  less  m.erciless  in  their  enforcement  of 
caste  laws  on  those  avIio  may  be  still  lower  in 
the  social  scale  than  themselves.  It  is  also 
worthy  of  notice  that  while  a  few  advanced 
thinkers,  especially  in  the  Brahmo  Samaj  and 
a  few  similar  associations,  repudiate  caste  laws, 
yet  the  most  of  the  highly  educated  men  in 
India  still  feel  that,  practically,  whatever  else 
of  Hindooism  they  may  reject,  they  must  by  no 
means  break  the  bonds  of  caste.  Indeed  a  re- 
cent Bengali  writer  strenuously  maintains  that 
it  is  the  recognition  and  acceptance  of  the  rules 
of  caste,  and  not  any  particular  theological  be- 
lielTTIiat  constitutes  a  man  religiously  a  Hin- 
doo.   He  says^:  "  The  Hindoo  system  is  a  hier- 


130    Handbook  of  Comparative  Religion. 

archy  of  caste,  and  those  who  belong  to  this 
hierarchy  of  caste  are  Hindoos."  ^ 

Injustice  belongs  to  the  very  essence  both 
of  tlie  teachings  and  the  practice  of  Hindooism 
concerning  caste.  Manu  declares  that  a  king 
"  should  not  slay  a  Brahman,  even  if  he  be  oc- 
cupied in  crime  of  every  sort ;  but  he  should 
put  him  out  of  the  realm  in  possession  of  all 
his  property,  and  uninjured."  ^  Again,  he  says : 
"  If  a  low-born  man,  a  Shudra,  assault  one  of 
the  twice-born  castes,  he  ought  to  have  his 
tongue  cut  out."  If  a  man  be  of  a  caste  lower 
than  the  Brahman,  he  is  not  to  be  taught  the 
law  of  the  Yeda  nor  is  any  religious  observance 
to  be  enjoined  upon  him ;  and  the  man  who 
teaches  him  religion  is  to  be  cast,  together  with 
his  pupil,  into  "  the  darkness  of  hell."  ^  Instead 
of  the  law  which  teaches  that  we  are  to  seek 
every  one  another's  good,  and  in  honor  to 
"  prefer  one  another,"  it  is  the  law^  of  Manu 
that  "  a  Brahman  may  take  possession  of  the 
goods  of  a  Shudra  with  perfect  peace  of  mind, 
since  nothing  at  all  belongs  to  this  Shudra  as 
his  own."  ^  Instead  of  giving  a  poor  Shudra 
what  is  good,  he  is  to  receive  from  the  Brahman 

^Introduction  to  the  Study  of  Hindooism  by  Guru  Prosad  Sen, 
p.  25. 
« Tnsfltuten  of  Manu,  Book  i.  380. 
»  Code  of  Manu,  Book  iv.  81. 
*Ib.  Book  viii.  417. 


Practical  Morals.  131 

"  the  blighted  part  of  the  grain,  and  one's  old 
clothes  and  furniture."  ^ 

It  will  be  said,  and  truly,  that  such  laws  as 
these  are  not  actually  carried  out.  But  the 
reason  is  obvious.  Under  the  British  rule  in 
India,  the  Brahman  Avho  should  attempt  to  act 
toward  the  lower  castes  in  all  respects  accord- 
ing to  the  authoritative  law  of  Manu,  would 
soon  find  himself  in  the  penitentiary.  But  this 
undoubted  improvement  in  the  situation  can- 
not be  fairly  credited  to  Hindooism.  And  of 
caste,  even  as  it  exists  to-day,  under  the  British 
administration  of  India,  not  a  Christian,  but  a 
Hindoo  reformer  has  said :  "  That  caste  is  a 
frightful  social  scourge,  no  one  can  deny. 
.  .  .  When  we  view  it  on  moral  grounds,  it 
appears  as  a  scandal  to  conscience,  and  an  in- 
sult to  humanity,  and  all  our  moral  ideals  and 
sentiments  rise  to  execrate  it."  ^ 

Hindoo  ethics  is  again  to  be  contrasted  with 
Christian  morals,  in  the  position  which  is  as- 
signed to  woman.  iSTo  doubt  excellent  things 
may  be  quoted  even  from  Manu,  as  to  the 
honor  in  which  v^'omen  should  be  held ;  as 
when  he  says  that  "  women  are  to  be  honored 
by  fathers  and  brothers,  by  husbands,  as  also 

»  Code  of  Manu,  Book  x.  125. 

^  Keshub  Chuiider  Sen,  in  his  Appeal  to  Young  India. 


132    Handbook  of  Comjyarative  Religion, 

by  brothers-in-law  who  desire  much  prosperity, 
etc."  ^  But  then  the  same  authority  teaches 
that  on  occasion  "  a  wife  .  .  .  should  be 
beaten  with  a  cord  or  a  bamboo  cane."  ^  If 
loyalty  to  a  husband  is  enjoined  by  all  Hindoo 
authorities,  the  duties  required  by  that  loyalty 
are  exaggerated  to  the  utmost.  Thus  in  the 
Skanda  Purana  it  is  said  :  "  Let  the  wife  who 
wishes  to  perform  sacred  oblations  wash  the 
feet  of  her  lord,  and  drink  the  water.  .  .  . 
The  husband  is  her  god,  her  priest,  and  her  re- 
ligion ;  wherefore,  abandoning  everything  else, 
she  ought  chiefly  to  worship  her  husband."  ^ 

The  treatment  of  widows  in  India,  even  of 
those  who  are  mere  children,  is  a  matter  which 
is  notorious.  It  is  indeed  sometimes  charged 
that  missionaries  exaggerate  the  evils  incident 
to  Hindoo  widowhood ;  but  it  was  not  a  mis- 
sionary, but  a  Hindoo  ^  who  has  used  the  fol- 
lowing strong  language:  "An  adequate  idea 
of  the  intolerable  hardships  of  early  widow- 
hood can  be  formed  only  by  those  whose 
daughters,  sisters,  daughters-in-law,  and  other 
female  relations  have  been  deprived  of  their 
husbands  during  infancy." 

But  worst  of  all  in  Hindoo  ethics  is  the  de- 


'  Code  0/  Manu,  Book  iii.  59.  'lb.  Book  iv.  299. 

^Op.  cit.  iv.  135. 

*  Pundit  Iswaia  Chundra  Vidyasagar. 


Practical  Morals.  133 

nial  of  the  necessary  and  essential  distinction 
l^jetween" rlgEFaSd^'wrong.  This  vitiates  every- 
thing-. As  already  observed,  the  Eamayan  for- 
mally teaches  the  doctrine  that  "  might  makes 
right,"  and  in  the  Bhagavad  Gita,  which  is 
probably  the  purest  and  noblest  production  of 
Hindoo  literature,  the  doctrine  is  most  fully 
and  plainly  taught  that  actions  in  themselves 
defile  no  one,  so  that  they  are  but  performed 
in  the  state  of  mind  which  is  enjoined  in  the 
poem.  Krishna  is  therein  said  to  declare  of 
himself  as  God  incarnate,  "  Actions  defile  me 
not ; "  and  of  his  worshipers,  "  He  who  know- 
eth  me  thus,  is  not  bound  by  actions." ' 

That  this  belief  is  not  merely  the  teaching 
of  the  sacred  books  of  the  Hindoos,  but  is  the 
actual  creed  of  many  of  the  educated  Hindoos 
of  to-day,  is  an  indisputable  fact.  In  a  book 
published  by  S.  C.  Muhopadhaya,  M.  A..  The 
Imitation  of  Sree  Krishna^  this  educated  Ben- 
gali gentleman  says :  "  To  our  mind  virtue  and 
vice  being  relative  terms  can  never  be  applied 
to  one  who  is  regarded  as  the  Supreme  Being. 
.  .  .  Conceive  a  man  who  is  trying  his  ut- 
most to  fly  from  vice  to  its  opposite  pole  vir- 
tue; ,  .  .  imagine  a  being  to  whom  vir- 
tue and  vice  are  the  same ;  and  you  will  find 

•Op.  clt.  iv.  14. 


134    Handhooh  of  Comjxirative  Religion. 

that  the  latter  is  infinitely  superior  to  the 
former."  (!)  Nothing  then  is  of  necessary  and 
unalterable  obligation;  and  to  do  right  or  to 
do  wickedly,  is  merely  a  question  of  expedi- 
ency !  '^"'"^  '^~ 

If  this  be  so,  then  it  follows  that  the  idea 
of  moral  obligation  is  simply  an  illusion.  ^  Ac- 
cording to  Christian  ethics,  the  ultimate  reason 
ys\\\  this  or  that  should  be  done  or  not  done, 
is  found  in  the  fact  that  such  is  the  will  of  an 
infinitely  good,  wise,  and  holy  God,  to  whom 
we  are  bound  by  an  indissoluble  bond,  to  whom 
Ave  owe  everything,  and  on  Avhom  we  abso- 
lutely depend.  Hence  the  profound  moral  sig- 
nificance of  our  common  words  to  denote  this 
moral  obligation.  "Duty"  is  that  which  is 
'*•  due  "  from,  or  is  owed  by  me  to  another.  In 
the  word  "ought"  the  same  thought  is  ex- 
pressed in  Anglo  Saxon,  as  in  the  other  case 
in  a  word  of  Latin  origin.  For  "ought"  is 
"  owed,"^  and  what  I  ought  to  do  is  what  I  owe 
to  some  one ;  so  that  sin  in  this  aspect  becomes 
a  debt  {clebitmii)  even  as  our  Lord  taught  in 
the  Lord's  Prayer.  Xow  it  is  a  very  striking 
fact  that  in  Hindi,  the  language  of  full  one- 
third  of  the  population  of  India — and,  to  the 

'As  in  Tynflnle's  New  Testament,  LnUe  vii.41.  ''There  was  a  cer- 
tain lender  which  had  two  debtors,  the  one  ought  five  hundred 
pence." 


Practical  Morals.  135 

best  of  my  knowledge,  in  the  other  Aryan 
languages  of  India — there  is  no  term  which 
really  corresponds  to  this  class  of  words  in 
English.  Every  preacher  and  translator  in 
India  has  painfully  felt  his  impotence  when 
attempting  to  express  in  the  vernacular,  these 
profound  moral  conceptions.  Of  such  words 
in  North  India  the  most  common  is  chdMyey 
which  however  only  means  "  that  which  is  to 
be  desired  "  [  thus  tacitly  implying  that  only 
what_one  may  >vish  to.dg.is  what  he  ought  to 
do.  The  story  is  told  of  an  eminent  mission- 
ary translator  into  Bengali,  who  was  seeking 
for  a  Bengali  equivalent  for  the  w^ord  "con- 
science ",  to  Avhom  his  native  pundit  replied, 
after  the  missionary  had  tried  to  explain  to 
him  the  content  of  this  English  term :  "  Sahib, 
where  there  is  not  the  thing,  how  can  one 
have  the  Avord  ? "  Yet  this  is  not  strange : 
for  Avhere  pantheism  has  become  the  faith  of  a 
people,  how  can  such  ideas  as  "  duty  "  or  "  con- 
science," in  the  Christian  sense  of  those  terms, 
have  any  longer  a  place?  All  such  terms 
connote  relations  to  a  Being  who  is  personal, 
and  whose  wall  is  and  must  be  for  us  law.  But 
when  the  Person  has  vanished  from  the  spiritual 
vision,  the  relationship  to  Him  also  of  neces- 
sity disappears. 


136    Handbook  of  Comparative  Religion, 

In  our   day   the   ethics   of   Buddhism    has 
been  by  many  extolled  almost  without  limit. 
We  can  readily  admit  that  when  contrasted 
with    the   moral    system    of   the    Hindooism 
ao^ainst  which  it  was  a  revolt,  it  is  in  many 
ways  far  superior.     It  was  a  noble  and  right- 
eous protest  against  the  tyranny  of  caste,  and 
boldly  asserted  the  equality  of  all  men.^     It 
was  also  a  protest  against  the  degrading  cere- 
monialism of  the  popular  Hindooism,  and  de- 
clared most  truly,  in  words  which  remind  us 
of    the    teaching    of    our    Lord :      "  Anger, 
intoxication,    obstinacy,    deceit,    envy,   gran- 
diloquence, pride  and  conceit,  intimacy  with 
the  unjust;   this  is  uncleanness,  but  not  the 
eating  of   flesh."  ^     Hence,  in   contrast  with 
Hindooism,  niany  moral  duties  are  placed  in 
the   foreground  of  the  Buddhist  system,  and 
their  observance  declared  essential  to  salva- 
tion.    Its    first    five    commandments    forbid 
lying,  stealing,  kiliing7d"f inking  what  can  in- 
toxTcate,  and  adultery.     Kot  only  so,  but  Bud- 
dhism teaches  that  not  merely  outward  actions, 

»Biit,  not  the  " brotherhood '*  of  men.  as  somelimes  represented. 
For  brotherhood  implies  a  common  f.ither;  but  of  a  Ciod  :iiid 
Father  of  men,  of  whom  all  men  are  in  a  trne  sense  '-tiie  oh- 
spriiifr,"  the  Buddlia,  with  all  his  supposed  enliglitenment,  knew 
iiothini;. 

2  Suita  Nipata ;  Amaqandha  Sutta,  7.  Yet  the  Buddhists  of  to- 
dnv  lav  the  greatest  stress  on  abstinence  from  eat  inp;  flesh,  as  a 
high  relitiions  duty:  and  are  indeed  in  this  In  full  accord  with 
otlier  teachings  of  the  Buddliist  Scriptures. 


Practical  Morals.  137 

but  also  inner  states  and  feelings  constitute 
sin.  Instead  of  retaliating  for  injuries,  it  is 
written :  "  Let  a  man  overcome  anger  by 
love;  let  him  overcome  evil  by  good."  Ve 
are  to  "leave  the  sins  of  the  mind,"  as  well  as 
those  which  are  outward :  ^  the  lustful  look  at 
the  wife  of  another,  is  sin. 

But,  for  all  this,  very  deep  and  significant  is 
thejjontrast  between  Buddhist  and  Christian 
e^ics.  First  and  most  fundamental  is  the  fact 
th^  since  Buddhism  ignores  the  being  of  a  God, 
the  moral  "  law  "  of  Buddhism  knows  nothing 
of  any  duty  that  a  man  owes  to  Him.  From 
which  it  follows  immediately  that  God  being 
thus  ignored,  the  ground  of  obligation,  even 
as  regards  undoubted  duties  of  man  to  man,  is 
not  found  in  the  will  and  command  of  an  'in- 
finitely  good  and  holy  God.  In  fact,  it  is 
quite  correct  to  say  that,  if  one  will  speak  ac- 
curately, there  is  no  such  thing  as  "law,"  in 
our  sense  of  the  word,  in  Buddhist  ethics.  '  All 
is  merely  advisory.  The  word  is  constantly 
used  in  translating  Buddhist  works,  but  this 
must  never  be  forgotten,  that  it  connotes  noth- 
ing mandatory. 

Again,    while   we   may  gladly   admit   that 
many  counsels  are  given  in  Buddhist  books 

'  Dhammapada.  222,  232. 


138    Handhooh  of  Comj^avative  Reliyion. 

which  are  most  excellent,  and  while  passages 
may  be  produced  in  which,  as  remarked,  a 
merely  ceremonial  righteousness,  as  compared 
with  moral  purity  and  righteousness,  is  depre- 
ciated utterly  :  yet  in  utter  inconsistency  with 
this,  it  is  taught  that  whoever  wishes  to  attain 
to  the  summit  of  Buddhist  saintship,  must  at- 
tend to  a  variety  of  ceremonial  observances, 
many  of  which  are  ^most^  puerile,  and  some 
even  revolting  to  decency.  Thus,  in  Buddhist 
ethics,  injunctions  most  excellent  are  mingled 
with  others  to  observances  utterly  trivial  and 
indifferent,  and  in  some  instances  even  degrad- 
ing ;  as,  for  example,  the  direction  to  the  saint 
to  go  clad  in  rags  and  lead  a  mendicant  life. 
If  it  is  written  that  no  one  should  lie,  or  steal, 
or  commit  adultery;  it  is  added  that  if  one 
would  attain  to  a  still  higher  degree  of  saint- 
ship  than  the  observance  of  such  duties  alone 
would  make  possible,  he  must  not  use  tooth- 
powders,  nor  sleep  on  a  bed  which  is  broad  or 
high  ! 

This  utter  confusion  of  the  moral  sense 
which  is  evidenced  by  the  ethics  of  Buddhism, 
is  well  illustrated  by  the  well-known  enumer- 
ation of  'Hhe  Ten  Sins,"  which  the  Buddhist 
saint  must  overcome.  Among  these  we  find, 
quite  rightly,  hatred,  pride,  and  self-righteous- 


Practical  Morals.  139 

ness,  and  dependence  on  rites :  but  on  the  other 
hand  lire  enumerated^  "  doubt,"  nanielv,  of  the 
truth  of  the  atheistic  and  pessimistic  teaching 
offfie  Buddha ;''' the  delusion  of  self,"  that  is, 
the  belief  in  the  existence  of  the  Ego  as  a 
permanent  subsistence;  "  sensuality  "—not  in 
our  sense  of  the  word— but  all  gratification  of 
the  senses;  and  finally  all  love  of  life  on 
earth,  and  all  desire  for  life  anywhere  else, 
even  in  heaven. 

Finally,  whereas  in  the  Christian  system  of 
morals,  the  highest  motive  to  all  right  living 
is  found  in  supreme  love  to  a  God  who  is  both 
the  absolutely  perfect  expression  of  all  moral 
beauty  and  excellence,  and  our  Father  in 
heaven,  in  the  Buddhist  ethics,  the  higliest 
motive  is  found  in  the  desire  to'escape,  by 
obedience  to  the  Buddha's  "law,"  from  the 
misery  which  in  greater  or  less  degree  is  said 
to  be  inseparably  connected  with  existence 
even  in  heaven  itself.  Thus  while  the  Chris- 
tian moral  ideal  is  found  in  perfect  love  to  an 
absolutely  perfect  Being,  leading  to  utter  self- 
forgetfulness  for  His  sake,  in  Buddhism,  the 
ideal  is  found  in  an  absolute  and  selfish  as- 
ceticism, Avhich  in  its  fullest  realization  regards 
virtue  and  vice  alike  Avith  indifference. 

To  the  ethical  system  of  Confucius  one  may 


140    Handbook  of  Convparative  Religion. 

rightly  give  much  praise.  If  all  men  were  to 
obey  his  precepts,  one  may  safely  say  that  this 
would  at  least  be  a  far  happier  world  than  it 
is.  All  men,  Confucius  taught,  should  seek  to 
live  a  virtuous  life.  All  virtue,  he  said,  begins 
with  knowledge,  and  knowledge  is  obtain- 
able only  through  learning.  Only,  according 
to  Confucius,  the  source  of  knowledge  is  not 
independent  thought,  but  the  careful  study  of 
the  teachings  of  the  great  sages  of  antiquity. 
By  this  a  man  may  hope  to  arrive  at  truth, 
and  especially  the  knowledge  of  his  own 
defects  and  shortcomings.  Attaining  to  this 
knowledge,  the  superior  man  will  above  all  be 
sincere.  His  supreme  affections  and  his  high- 
l?^tr  desires  will  be  set  on  what  is  riglit.  He 
will  be  "gentle,  forbearing  and  forgiving." 
Asked  by  one  to  give  him  a  rule  of  moral  con- 
duct which  might  serve  to  regulate  all  one's 
life,  Confucius  answered  :  "  Reciprocity.  AVhat 
you  do  not  want  done  to  yourself,  do  not  do 
to_  others."  It  must  be  admitted  that  this 
falls  below  the  "  Golden  Rule "  of  the  :N^ew 
Testament,  in  that  it  does  not  positively  en- 
join one  to  do  what  he  wishes  that  another 
should  do  to  him,  but  only,  negatively,  to  ab- 
stain from  what  he  would  not  like  to  have 
done  to  himself;  still,  one  cannot  but  recog- 


Practical  Morals.  141 

nize  with  thankfulness  the  approximation  to 
the  teaching  of  Christ. 

Chief  among  the  virtues,  according  to  Con- 
fucius, stand  courage  and  benevolence.  Un- 
der the  latter  term,  however,  he  included 
much  more  than  the  word  commonly  connotes 
with  us.  It  is  explained  as  having  relation 
not  only  to  those  who  are  below  us,  but  no 
less  to  those  who  are  above  us ;  in  a  word,  it 
is  said  to  consist  in  "love  to  all  men."  As 
exemplified  in  life,  it  includes  the  rule  of 
"  reciprocity."  as  above  given,  then  "  loyalty," 
"r^yerencej"  and  "faith."  By  loyalty  is  in- 
tended not  merely  loyalty  to  one's  sovereign 
or  ruler,  but  no  less  to  equals  and  inferiors ;  in 
a  word,  faithfulness  in  the  performance  of  all 
the  duties  owed  by  man  to  his  fellow  in  every 
relation  of  life.  Eeverence  is  explained  as 
first  exemplified  in  the  feeling  of  the  son  to- 
ward his  father ;  then,  of  all  subjects  to  their 
rulers;  and  then,  of  the  emperor  himself  to 
heaven.  By  "faith"  is  apparently  intended 
sincerity  in  the  performance  of  all  these 
duties. 

Among  all  the  vii'tues  in  which  the  per- 
formance of  these  duties  will  be  exemplified, 
filial  piety  is  given  a  foremost  place.  This  is 
said  to  be  indeed  "  the  beginning  of  all  virtue," 


14:2    Eandhook  of  Compamtive  Religion. 

and  brotherly  love  "the  sequel  of  vu-tue." 
FiliaLpiety  is  said  to  consist  in  serving  and 
obe3TDgLQne!a-^wents_^^  as  thej^  live,  and 
in  giving  them  a  suitable  burial  when  they 
die  ;  to  which  it  is  added  that  it  also  requires 
that  after  their  death  men  shall  offer  to  them 
sacrifices.  On  this  exaggerated  idea  of  what 
the  duty  of  filial  piety  requires,  is  based  the 
whole  system  of  anc£stral  worshi|3  prevalent 
in  China.  Confucius  declared  that  in  filial 
obedience  there  was  nothing  "so  essential 
as  to  reverence  one's  father";  and  that  "as 
a  mark  of  reverence  there  is  nothing  more  im- 
portant than  to  place  him  on  an  equality  with 
heaven."  Great  stress  was  laid  by  Confucius 
on  the  duties,  not  only  of  subjects  toward 
their  rulers,  but  on  the  duty  of  the  emperor 
toward  his  subjects. 

Such,  in  brief,  are  the  chief  points  in  the 
moral  teaching  of  Confucius,  and  in  them  we 
all  will  admit  there  is  much  to  commend. 

On  the  other  hand,  as  in  Buddhism,  so  in 
Confucianism,  duties  to  God,  if  not  absolutely 
ignored,  are  relegated  to  the  background.  It 
^vould  probably  not  be  correct  to  say  that 
Confucius  was  an  atheist ;  but,  if  he  endorsed 
the  ancient  rule  of  reciprocity,  he  seems  to 
have  utterly  failed  to  discover  that  other  rule 


Practical  Morals.  143 

which  requires  us  not  only  to  love  our  neigh- 
bor as  ourself,  but  also  to  love  the  Lord  our 
God  with  all  our  heart,  mind,  and  strength ; 
and  which  also  rightly  places  this  first,  as  the 
root  from  which  the  love  to  one's  neighbor  is 
sure  to  spring. 

As  in  Buddhism,  so  in  Confucianisni,  ^\[oman 
is  depreciated,  and  the  duties  arising  out  of 
the  relations  of  man  and  woman  are  very  im- 
perfectly apprehended.  The  sister,  for  ex- 
ample, is  not  contemplated  when  Confucius 
extols  fraternal  affection.  Kot  until  a  girl  be- 
comes a  mother,  does  she  acquire  any  proper 
claim  to  regard.  In  the  opinion  of  Confucius, 
the  most  difficult  people  of  all  to  manage,  are 
"  women  and  servants." 

Marriage,  with  the  Confucian,  is  not,  as  in 
the  InTcw  Testament,  in  order  that  husband 
and  wife  may  live  together  in  mutual  helpful- 
ness, "  as  being  heirs  together  of  the  grace  of 
life  " ; '  but  is  simply  in  order  to  the  procre- 
ation of  children.  It  naturally  follows  from 
this  conception  of  the  ideal  and  object  of  mar- 
riage, that  both  divorce  for  many  reasons,  and 
also  polygamy,  are  sanctioned.  If  a  wife  bear 
no  children,  her  husband  may  at  his  pleasure 
either  divorce  her,  or  may  take  another  wife. 
'IPet.  m.7. 


144:    Handbook  of  ComparoMve  Religion. 

The  "  Rites  of  the  Chow  Dynasty  "  enact  that 
since  it  is  of  special  importance  that  the  em- 
peror should  have  a  son  to  succeed  him,  he 
should  have  beside  the  empress,  one  hundred 
and  twenty  concubines.  For  divorce,  Confu- 
cius enumerated  seven  sufficient  reasons, 
namely :  disobedience  to  either  of  the  wife's 
parents-in-law ;  barrenness ;  lewdness ;  jeal- 
ousy ;  leprosy ;  garrulousness ;  and  stealing. 
As  the  pi-ocreation  of  sons  is  the  chief  object 
of  marriage,  it  is  made  the  duty  of  the  child- 
less widower  to  marry  again ;  while,  on  the 
contrary,  if  a  widow  remarry,  this  is  held  to 
be  a  sign  of  a  bad  and  lustful  character.  To 
sum  up  in  the  words  of  Professor  Douglas, 
from  whose  valuable  little  Handbook  I  have 
largely  drawn  :  "  The  failure  to  recognize  the 
sanctity  of  the  marriage  bond  is  a  great  blot 
on  the  Confucian  system.  It  has  in  a  great 
measure  destroyed  domesticity,  it  has  robbed 
women  of  their  lawful  influence,  and  has  de- 
graded them  into  a  position  which  is  little  bet- 
ter than  slavery." 

The  ethics  of  Jaouism_is  represented  in  tjvo 
small  books,  the  Yin  chili  vmn,  or  "  Book  ^f 
S^cr^Blessings,"  and  the  Kan  ying  jyeen,  or 
"B^ok__of_  Ee wards  .^and  Punishments. "  A 
translation  of  the  whole  text  of  the  last  named 


Practical  Morals.  145 

booklet  is  given  by  Professor  Douglas, '^  and 
consists  of  two  hundred  and  twelve  precepts, 
a  large  part  of  which  are  every  way  commend- 
able, and  enjoin  most  of  those  natural  virtues 
which  the  common  conscience  of  mankind  re- 
quires. Thus  we  read  :  "  Practice  righteous- 
ness an<l  filial  piety,  be  affectionate  toward 
your  younger  brothers,  and  respectful  toward 
your  elder  brothers."  "  Have  pity  for  orphans, 
and  cherish  widows."  "  Kespect  old  men,  and 
cherish  infants."  "Pity  the  misfortunes  of 
others."  "Kejoice  in  the  successes  of  others, 
and  sympathize  with  their  reverses."  "Xever 
boast  of  superiority."  "Bestow  favors  Avith- 
out  expecting  recompense."  "  Do  not  calum- 
niate your  fellow-students."  "Be  not  hard, 
violent,  or  inhuman."  "Be  not  forgetful  of 
benefits."  "  Commit  not  murder  for  the  sake 
of  gain."  "  When  you  know  what  is  right,  do 
it."  "Do  not  separate  husband  and  wife." 
"  T\nien  you  see  others  possessed  of  riches,  do 
not  desire  that  they  may  lose  them." 

While  the  duties  of  man  to  man  are  thus 
fully  set  forth,  we  find  in  this  book  only  two 
allusions  to  any  duty  to  a  Supreme  Being, 
thus:  "Do  not  murmur  against  Heaven  at 
your  lot."     "  Do  not  seek  to  obtain  anything 

'  Confuciayiism  (mcl  Taouism,  pp.  257-271, 


146    Handhooh  of  Comjjarative  Beligion. 

beyond  the  lot  appointed  \^ou  by  Heaven." 
Moreover,  as  so  often  in  other  non-Christian 
religions,  with  such  commendable  precepts  as 
the  above,  are  mingled  others  which  are  merel}^ 
silly  and  puerile.  Thus  :  "  Do  not  leap  over 
a  well  or  a  hearth."  "  Do  not  shout  or  get 
angry  on  the  first  day  of  the  month."  "  Do 
not  spit  toward  shooting  stars."  "Do  not 
weep  or  spit  toward  the  north."  "Do  not 
point  at  a  rainbow."  "  Do  not  stare  at  the  sun 
or  moon." 

Shnjlarrenuaiv^  be  made,  in  general, 

as  to  the  contents  of  the  other  ethical  book  of 
the  Taouists,  the  Yin  ckih  wan.  In  it  we 
read  :  "  Devote  your  w^ealth  to  the  good  of 
your  fellow-men."  "  In  all  your  actions  fol- 
low the  principles  of  Heaven,  and  in  all  your 
words  follow  the  purified  heart  of  man." 
"Feed  the  hungry,  clothe  the  naked,  and  bury 
the  dead."  But  also  :  "  Xever  destroy  paper 
which  is  written  upon."  "  Be  careful  not  to 
tread  upon  insects  on  the  road  "  ;  etc.,  etc.^ 

Not  to  enter  into  further  detail  as  to  the 
ethics  of  the  various  non-Chi'istian  religions,  it 
is  to  be  observed,  in  general,  that  in  all,  to  a 
great  extent  in  theory — as  universally  in  prac- 
tice— m  oral  i  ty  i  s  d  i sse  v er ed__f r om  religion.     In 

'See  C<mfueianism  and  Taoidsm,  pp.  272-274. 


Practical  Morals.  147 

all  alike,  itjs  true  thal-ajiian  ma^v_be^very  re- 
ligious, and_j^t  inone  wa3^oiv-iLiiather,  very 
wicked.  To  be  a  Confucian  in  good  standing, 
if  only" the  authority  of  the  sage  is  recognized, 
it  is  not  necessary  to  recognize  God  in  any 
way.  The  fearful  prevalence  of  infanticide  in 
Confucian  China,  is  a  sad  illustration  of  our 
remark.  To  be  a  Hindoo  in  good  repute  as 
regards  religion,  it  is  by  no  means  necessary 
to  abstain  from  lying,  stealing,  or  even  murder. 
This  is  evident  from  the  fact  that  while  in 
India  there  are  very  many  things  because  of 
which  a  man  may  be  excommunicated  from 
caste  fellowship,  violations  of  the  moral  law 
are  not  among  these. 

But  this  is  only  the  natural  consequence  of 
the  fact  that  in  the  preceptive  part  of  the  best 
of  the  ethnic  religions,  the  observance  of  vari- 
ous ceremonial  injunctions  is  practically  made 
of  much  more  consequence  than  the  keeping 
of  the  law  of  morality.  The  effect  of  this 
upon  the  people  is  most  manifest  everywhere, 
in  all  non-Christian  lands.  I  have  known  a 
man,  while  in  the  midst  of  lying  to  me  about 
work  which  he  had  done  for  me,  to  refuse  to 
touch  a  piece  of  old  dry  bone,  on  the  plea  that 
it  was  contrary  to  religion.  In  all  the  great 
world-religions  except  Christianity,  the  moral, 


148    Handbook  of  Cum])arative  Religion, 

the  immoral,  and  the  morally  indifferent  are 
hopelessly  confounded. 

Most  noteworthy,  again,  is  the  fact  that 
whereas  the  ethics  of  the  Xew  Testament, 
while  no  doubt  teaching  a  certain  subordina- 
tion of  woman  to  man,  yet  ever  regards 
woman  as  the  equal  of  man,  as  an  heir  to- 
gether with  him  of  the  grace  of  life ;  on  the 
other  hand,  in  all  the  other  great  world-reli- 
gions, in  one  way  or  another,  and  more  or  less 
formally,  woman  is  debased.  Most  commonly 
this  is  brought  about  through  concubinage  and 
polygamy,  which,  as  already  shown,  have  the 
formal  sanction  of  the  Quran;  while  also 
among  the  Hindoos  of  all  schools,  as  among 
the  followers  of  Confucius,  polygamy  is  more 
or  less  formally  recognized  as  lawful. 

Even  the  modern  reformed  schools  of  Hin- 
dooism  have  not  always  been  able  to  free 
themselves  from  this  reproach.  It  is,  more- 
over, to  the  special  infamy  of  the  Arya  Samaj 
of  North  India,  that  while  in  many  ways  this 
Samaj  encourages  the  education  and  elevation 
of  women,  yet  the  Aryas  earnestly  uphold  and 
justify  the  infamous  Hindoo  rite  of  niyoga  ; 
which  may  best  be  descri})ed  as  an  arrange- 
ment by  which  a  childless  husband,  in  order  to 
secure  offspring  and  so  continue  his  family,  ar- 


Practical  Morah.  149 

ranges  for  the  adultery  of  his  wife  through  her 
temporary  union  with  anotlier  man. 

Buddhism  wouhl  seem  to  deal  better  with 
woman,  in  some  respects,  than  Mohammedan- 
ism and   Ilindooism.     The  cruel  seclusion  of 
women  which  in  accordance  with  the  Quran,  is 
the  rule  in  :Mohammedan  lands,  and  to  so  great 
extent  in  India— where   :\loslem  violence  and 
licentiousness  made  it  necessary  after  the  Mo- 
hammedan invasions— is  unknown  in  Buddhist 
countries  like  Burmah  and  Siam,  where  in  this 
respect  women  have  all  the  liberty  which  is 
enjoyed   by  their   sisters   in  Christian  lands. 
Xevertheless,   Buddhism  does  not  exalt,   but 
debases   woman.     Instead    of   elevating  and 
glorifying  the  marriage  relation,  as  does  the 
gospel    law,    it   declares   in   its   authoritative 
Scriptures  that  "  the  house  life  is  the  seat  of 
impurity  "  ; '  and  teaches  that  "  so  long  as  the 
love  of  man  toward  women,  even  the  smallest, 
is  not  destroyed,  so  long  is  his  mind  in  bond- 
age." ^     He  who  would  attain  to  any  high  de- 
gree of  saintship  is  charged  that  he  have  noth- 
ing to  do  with  any  woman,  not  so  much  as  to 
speak  to  one.^     With  the  idea  of  woman  which 
such  injunctions  imply,  it  is  not  strange  that 

'  Sutta  Nipata  ;  Pabbajja  Sutta,  2. 

■D/iammapada.2Si. 

'See  Mafiaparinibbana  Sutta,  v.  23. 


160    Handbook  of  Lknuparative  Religion. 

Buddhism,  at  its  best,  has  never  succeeded  in 
elevating  woman  to  her  proper  place.  If  it 
has  not  enjoined  polygamy  or  polyandry,  it 
has  not  succeeded  in  suppressing  them;  and 
the  laxity  of  morals  in  Buddhist  lands  is 
notorious. 

Most  striking,  again,  is  the  contrast  that 
appears  between  Christianity  and  other  re- 
ligions as  regards  the  place  which  they 
severally  give  to  man's  duties  to  God.  As 
already  seen,  in  both  Buddhism  and  Con- 
fucianism, these  are  ignored.  In  Hindooism, 
if  not  ignored,  they  are  grievously  misrepre- 
sented ;  as  indeed  it  is  easy  to  see  that  they 
must  be,  when  we  remember  how  grievously 
Hindooism  errs  in  its  representations  of  God. 
Mohammedanism  no  doubt  very  fully  recog- 
nizes the  fact  that  man  has  duties  to  God,  but 
strangely  fails  to  inculcate  the  chief  duty : 
namely,  to  love  the  Lord  our  God  with  all  the 
heart,  which  alone  is  the  root  and  the  bond  of 
all  moral  perfections.  But  how  indeed  could 
a  God  such  as  is  exhibited  in  the  Quran,  be 
loved  ?  He  might  no  doubt,  be  regarded  with 
great  awe ;  and  may  be  very  greatly  dreaded ; 
but  never  loved. 

Again,  the  great  religions  of  the  world 
stand  contrasted  with  Christianity  in  respect 


Practical  MoraU.  151 

to  the  highest  motive  which  they  severally 
place  before  man. 

The  chief  motive  which  is  brought  before  us 
in  the  ethics  of  the  gospel  is  that  of  grateful 
love  to  a  God  who  has  not  only  made,  and  ever 
upholds  us,  but  has  given  llis  only  Son  for  our 
salvation.  Other  motives  are  doubtless  recog- 
nized, Ixit  to  this  one  supreme  motive  all 
others  are  made  subordinate. 

On  the  other  hand,  no  other  religion  knows 
in  its  S3'steni  of  morality  any  motive  higher 
than  that  of  expediency.  The  morals  of  Con- 
fucius, which  contain  so  much  that  is  excellent, 
nevertheless  never  rise  above  the  motive  of 
the  politic  and  ex})edient.  If  you  live  so  and 
so,  it  will  be  better  for  you,  and  better  for  the 
8tate.  Buddhism,  knowing  nothing  of  a  God, 
obviously  can  know  nothing  of  the  love  of  God 
as  a  motive.  Over  and  over,  on  the  other 
hand,  the  Buddhist  authorities  represent  the 
ultimate  motive  for  all  action  or  abstinence 
from  any  action  as  "  the  quieting  of  pain."  If 
self-restraint  in  all  things  is  extolled,  it  is  be- 
cause such  a  man  is  "  freed  at  last "  through 
the  attainment  of  the  unconscious  nirvana,, 
"  from  all  pain."  * 

Xor  can  better  be  said  for  Hindooism.     Not 

'  Dhammapada.  361, 


152    Hciiidbook  of  Cotivparative  Religion. 

holiness,  nor  even  happiness,  but  rather  free- 
dom from  pain,  is  the  great  motive.  This 
takes  the  form  of  desire  for  exemption  from 
further  transmigration.  If  a  man  is  exhorted 
to  live  so  and  so,  this  is  in  order  that  he  may 
thus  bring  to  an  end  the  wearisome  succession 
of  repeated  births,  and  therewith  the  inevi- 
table pain  and  suffering  which  birth  insures. 

Very  touching  is  the  expression  of  this  long- 
ing, this  dread  of  an  earthl}^  existence  rencAved, 
which  is  sometimes  found  in  Indian  literature. 
Thus  in  a  song  of  South  India  one  moans : 

''  A  weary  and  brokeu-down  man, 
With  grief  I  come  to  thy  feet ; 
Subdued  by  the  pain  and  the  ban 
Of  a  sorrowful,  infinite  life," 

It  is  true  that  much  is  made  of  union  with 
God  as  the  chief  object  after  which  a  man 
should  strive.  But  when  we  learn  the  mean- 
ing of  the  words  employed,  it  becomes  evident 
that  not  a  moral,  but  a  physical,  union  is  in- 
tended. The  Hindoo  devotee  seeks  that  he 
may  in  such  a  sense  become  united  with  the 
infinite  Brahma,  tliat  he  shall  have  no  exist- 
ence as  separate  and  distinct  from  him ;  but 
lose  at  once  self-consciousness  and  personality 
in  Him,  or  rather,  in  that  eternal,  unconscious 
impersonal  Essence,  and  so  end  pain  forever. 


Practical  Mo  rah.  153 

It  should  hardly  be  necessary  to  add  that  in 
nothing  do  the  best  of  the  non-Christian  reli- 
gions stand  more  strikingly  contrasted  Avith 
Christianity,  than  in  the  fact  tliat  not  one  of 
these  religions,  either  in  modern  or  in  ancient 
times,  has  ever  shown  any  power  to  realize  in 
the  lives  of  its  followers  any  high  moral  ideal ; 
not  even  in  so  far  as  that  ideal  has  been  dimly 
perceived.  It  is  no  doubt  true  that  for  almost 
every  precept  of  Chi-istianity  which  concerns 
the  duty  of  man  to  man,  a  parallel  can  be  shown 
in  the  ethical  teachings  of  other  religions. 
Purity,  truth,  generosity,  forgiveness  of  in- 
juries, patience,  benevolence, — all  these  are  in 
all  religions  extolled  greatly.  N'or  is  it  denied 
that  liei'e  and  there  in  the  non-Christian  world 
individuals  appear  in  whose  character  there  is 
much  to  admire,  and  who  are  often  much  bet- 
ter than  the  religions  they  profess.  But  it  is  a 
simple  matter  of  historic  fact  that  outside  of 
Christianity  the  general  failure  of  the  accepted 
religion  to  realize  theie  virtues,  andliflrsociety 
in  general  out  of  the  mire  of  sin  and  impurit}^ 
is  nothing  less  than  appalling. 

This  may  seem  to  some  very  harsh  and  un- 
charitable ;  but  let  us  hear  what  is  confessed 
by  intelligent  men  among  these  same  peoples. 
In  a  recent  article  on  the  late  ^Ir.  Gladstone 


154    Handhooh  of  ComjMirative  Religion. 

in  the  Urdu  paper,  The  Hindustani^  of  Luck- 
now,  the  editor,  who  is  not  a  Christian,  writes 
as  follows  with  regard  to  the  moral  condition 
of  his  countrymen : 

"  We  Indians  are  yet  far  from  true  progress. 
Englishmen  rule  over  us  because  they  are  pos- 
sessed of  those  high  moral  virtues  of  which  we 
have  not  a  vestige,  nor  are  likely  to  acquire 
them  for  centuries  yet.  Leave  alone  political 
matters,  is  there  among  us  a  pious  and  highly 
moral  man  ?  Does  he  get  justice  done  him  ? 
Are  not  people  ready  everywhere  to  put  him 
into  trouble  ?  .  .  .  It  is  impossible  for  our 
narrow  minds  to  understand  how  a  man  can 
devote  himself  to  the  service  of  his  nation.  It 
is  very  essential  that  before  we  demand  polit- 
ical rights  and  privileges  from  Englishmen  (our 
rulers)  we  should  endeavor  to  acquire  those 
virtues  which  alone  have  made  Englishmen 
great  among  the  nations  of  the  world." 

So  writes  this  Indian  gentleman  of  the  moral 
condition  of  his  countrymen,  and  such  admis- 
sions are  far  from  uncommon.  Yet  no  one  Avill 
claim  that  as  compared  Avith  China,  Africa, 
and  other  non-Christian  lands,  the  moral  con- 
dition of  India  is  exceptionally  bad.  AYe  do 
not  forget  that  much  gross  sin  is  also  practiced 
among  peoples  whom  we  call  Christian.     But 


I^raftical  Morals.  155 

in  estimating  the  significance  of  this,  it  must 
be  kept  in  mind  that  according  to  the  teaching 
of  the  Xew  Testament,  men  are  not  horn  Chris- 
tians, nor  are  they  true  Cliristians  in  virtue  of 
education  or  baptism,  but  only  thi'ough  re- 
pentance and  a  new  birth  b}'  the  Holy  Ghost. 
It  is  the  undoubted  fact  that  as  a  rule, 
where  we  meet  with  those  who  intelligently 
profess  to  have  known  the  saving  power  of 
God's  Holy  Spirit,  and  to  have  experienced 
this  transcendent  change,  we  do  see  such  a  de- 
gree of  deliverance  from  the  power  of  sin  as 
we  look  for  in  vain  among  the  most  devoted 
adherents  of  other  religions. 

AVhen  we  take  a  broader  view,  and  regard 
the  stat(^  of  society  in  Christian  communities, 
in  which  true  Christians  and  unbelievers  are 
mingled  together,  even  then  what  a  great  and 
marvelous  contrast  wath  the  condition  of  things 
in  lands  in  no  sense  Christian !  Despite  the 
existence  in  such  communities  of  many  great 
sins  and  crying  evils,  how  different  is  the  state 
of  society  and  the  atmosphere  of  public  opin- 
ion in  America  or  Great  Britain,  from  that 
which  exists  in  India,  China,  and  other  like 
countries,  none  assuredly  can  realize  who  have 
not  lived  in  other  than  Christian  lands.  From 
Christian  communities,  slavery  and  polygamy 


156    Handhooh  of  Comparative  Religion. 

have  disappeared.  The  horrible  unnatural 
crimes  of  which  the  apostle  Paul  speaks  in 
Rom.  i.,  common  enough  in  communities  not 
Christian  in  profession,  have  so  completely  dis- 
appeared from  Christian  lands  where  an  open 
and  free  Bible  is  found,  that  the  most  of  those 
who  read  the  terrible  description  of  Roman 
society  as  given  in  that  chapter,  do  not  even 
understand  what  the  apostle  means.  Where, 
in  a  word,  is  there  a  spot  on  the  whole  earth 
outside  of  Christian  lands,  where  a  decent  man 
would  of  choice  bring  up  his  children  ? 


CHAPTER  YIII. 

THE  RELATION  OF  THE  WORLD-RELIGIONS   TO 
CHRISTIANITY. 

What  is  the  true  relation  of  the  non-Chris- 
tian religions  to  the  religion  of  Christ  ?  Very 
commonly,  and  in  our  day  more  and  more,  it 
is  maintained  that  the  various  religions  of  man- 
kind, from  fetich  ism  up  to  Christianity,  repre- 
sent successive  stages  of  progress  in  the  natural 
evolution  of  religious  thought.  All  alike  are 
the  product  of  the  operation  of  the  human 
mind  upon  the  phenomena  of  the  material  and 
spiritual  Avorld  ;  and  thus  represent  a  progress- 
ive approximation  to  the  absolute  truth,  which 
many  tell  us  has  probably  not  even  yet  in  Chris- 
tianity been  reached.  Hence,  to  speak  of  the 
various  ethnic  religions  in  relation  to  Chris- 
tianit}^  as  religions  of  nature  contrasted  with 
revealed  religion,  or  as  the  "  false  "  religions, 
in  contrast  with  the  "  true,"  we  are  assured,  is 
wholly  unwarranted,  unscientific,  and  erro- 
neous. 

For  the  discussion  of  the  question  thus  I'aised 
157 


158    Handhook  of  Comparative  Religion. 

an  entire  book  would  be  required,  and  we  can- 
not pretend  to  enter  into  it  in  this  place. 
Only,  in  general,  as  against  the  view  above  set 
forth,  we  place  the  indisputable  facts  of  the 
history  of  religions.  There  is  not  the  slightest 
evidence  that,  as  a  law  of  evolution,  the  gen- 
eral tendency  of  religious  thought  among  men 
has  been  from  lower  to  higher  and  more  cor- 
rect thinking  and  belief  as  to  God  and  the  re- 
lation of  man  and  of  the  world  to  Him.  On 
the  contrary,  there  is  no  exception  to  the  rule 
that  from  the  earliest  beginnings  of  authentic 
histor}^  to  the  present  time,  the  history  of  each 
and  every  religion  has  been  a  history  of  de- 
cline and  increasing  obscuration  of  right  con- 
ceptions of  God,  interrupted  only  at  rare  inter- 
vals by  the  appearing  of  one  or  another  to  re- 
call to  the  minds  of  men,  at  least  in  some  im- 
perfect degree,  almoiit  forgotten  truths. 

It  was  so  in  Egypt,  where  the  earliest  ex- 
pressions of  religious  thought  are  incomparably 
the  purest  and  noblest.'  It  Avas  so  in  India 
also.  For  whatever  may  be  said  as  to  the 
excellencies  and  defects  of  the  ancient  Yedic 
religion,  it  was  assuredly  much  purer  and 
nearer   the   truth    in   its   conceptions   of   the 


'  See  Reuoixl :  Hibbert  Lectures,  on   The  Ongin  and  Oroioth  of 
jReligion,  etc.,  pp.  91,  249. 


The  Relation  of  the  World-Religions.  159 

"Heaven-Father "  than  the  vulgar  Ilindooisni 
of  modern  India.^  The  Chinese,  again,  unani- 
mously testify  to  the  same  effect ;  that  the  I'e- 
ligion  of  the  earliest  days  of  their  nation  was 
much  purer  than  the  religion  of  modern 
China.^  No  less  certain  again  is  it  that  mod- 
ern Buddhism  has  fallen  far  below  the  origi- 
nal faith  as  proclaimed  by  Gautama  Muni. 
The  Buddha  thought  he  saAv  no  one  anywhere 
whom  he  ought  to  worship  ;  ^  but  his  followers 
of  to-day  are  practically  as  truly  idolaters  as 
any  people  in  the  world/  l^ot  to  multiply  il- 
lustrations, to  represent  the  various  religions 
of  mankind  as  indicating  successive  stages  of 
religious  progress,  and  as  showing  a  continuous 
advance  in  the  apprehension  of  religious  truth, 
is  to  confound  movement  with  progress.  Move- 
ment there  has  undoubtedly  been,  but  the  law 
of  the  movement  has  ever  been  backward  and 
downward,  and  not  forward  and  upward.^  To 
maintain  the  contrary,  one  must  ignore  his- 

'See  the  explicit  admission  of  this  by  Professoi-  Mux  Miiller. 
HMory  of  Sanskrit  Literature,  i>.  559.  . 

'^See  Pioiessor  Doughis  on  the  worship  of  Shaiig  Te,  in  Conjii- 
cianism  arul  Taouism,  pi).  82.  83. 

3  In  the  Fardiika  of  the  Vinaya  Texts. 

*For  n  full  account  of  the  i)i()cess  of  this  degradation  from  the 
orisjinal  Biuklhisni,  see  Rhys  Davids'  Buddldmi,  chaps,  vii..  viii. 

"For  a  more  detailed  account  of  the  facts  wiiicli  justity  these 
statements  see  tlie  author's  GenefUftand  Growth  of  Religion,  Lon- 
d(m,  Macmillan  &  Co.,  pp.  203-247:  and  especially  the  whole  sec- 
ond volume  of  Ebrard's  Apoloqetik,  which  contains  an  exhau.stive 
presentation  of  the  historical  facts  that  justify  the  statements 
made  in  the  text. 


160    Handbook  of  Compcvrative  Religion, 

tor}^  and  set  at  naught  the  testimony  of  human 
experience  for  bygone  millenniums. 

As  Christians,  we  do  well  also  to  keep  in 
mind  that  not  only  is  the  fashionable  modern 
view  as  to  the  evolutionary  religious  progress 
of  mankind,  and  the  relation  of  the  various 
ethnic  religions  to  Christianity,  contradicted 
by  the  facts  of  history,  but  also,  no  less  cer- 
tainly, is  it  in  the  most  direct  opposition  to  the 
teachings  of  those  Scriptures  which  as  Chris- 
tians we  profess  to  receive  as  the  Word  of  God, 
In  both  the  Old  and  the  Xew  Testaments,  there 
is  much  about  the  religions  which  surrounded 
the  writers  of  the  various  books ;  and  never 
once  do  those  writers,  speaking  "as  they 
were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost,"  exhibit  that 
broad  "  sympathy  "  with  the  ethnic  religions 
which,  we  are  now  taught  by  many,  it  is 
the  first  duty  of  the  intelligent  Christian  to 
cherish. 

On  the  contrary,  the  rich  resources  of  the 
Hebrew  language  in  terms  relating  to  the 
moral  an<l  spiritual  life  are  taxed  to  the  utter- 
most, by  the  writers  of  the  Old  Testament 
books,  to  express  the  severity  of  their  con- 
demnation, and  the  depth  of  their  loathing  and 
contempt,  for  the  religions  of  Babylon,  Assyria, 
Canaan,  and  Egypt.     This  is  true  both  as  re- 


The  Relation  of  the  World-Eeligions.  161 

gards   idolatry  of   the  grosser  form,  and  all 
nature  worship  as  well,  together  with  the  false 
philosophy  by  which  these  were  popularly  jus- 
tified.    Yeiy~  striking   is   the  phrase   so  con- 
stantly recurring  in  the  Books  of  Kings  and 
Chronicles  concerning  the  apostatizing  kings 
of  Judah  and  Israel:  not  merely,  as  in  our 
authorized  version,  "  he  did  evil  in  the  sight  of 
the  Lord,"  but  always  in  Hebrew  with  the 
definite     article,    ''tlie    evil"— R.    v.,    "that 
which  was   evil",   in  other  words — as  often 
explained  by  themselves — the  king  in  question 
was  an  idolater.     Instead  of  looking  with  a 
kindly  sympathy  on  the  Assyrian  bowing  be- 
fore some  visible  symbol  of  the  Creator,  his 
idol    is  stigmatized   as  "an  abomination,"  a 
"stum])."     Or,   again,   the    idol    is   contemp- 
tuously termed  dven^  "  a  nothing,"  ayim^  "  a 
bugbear,"  or  elM,  with  ridicule,  as  "a  wee  god, 
a  godling  "  ;  and — with  special  reference,  prob- 
ably, to  phallic  images  such  as  are  common 
in  India  to-day — miphletseth^  "a  horror."     In- 
stead of  recognizing  in  the  worship  of  idols  a 
reaching  out  of  the  soul  after  God,  the  Holy 
Scriptures     represent     idolatry    as     rebellion 
against  Him.     It   is  reckoned  a  sin  of  such 
enormity  as  to  be  properly  classed  with  witch- 
craft, stubbornness,  hatred,  lying,  and  murder, 


162    Ilandhook  of  Comjxirative  Religion. 

etc.,  etc.^  Most  frequently  of  all  it  is  repre- 
sented by  the  Old  Testament  writers  as  a 
veritable  adultery  of  the  soul,  provoking  God 
to  a  fiery  heat  of  jealousy  ;  a  crime  which 
therefore,  like  the  type,  is  deserving  of  the 
most  condign  punishment.  Never  once  in  the 
whole  Old  Testament  is  the  Assyrian,  Egyp- 
tian, Phenician,  or  any  other  religion  of  the 
old  world,  represented  as  expressing  an  effort 
of  man  after  communion  with  God,  but,  in- 
stead, as  formal  revolt  against  Him ;  not  as 
marking  an  approach  of  the  soul  to  God,  but 
as  a  guilty  departure  from  Him.  When  the 
prophet  Isaiah  saw  the  men  of  his  time  bow- 
ing down  and  worshiping  carved  pieces  of 
wood  as  emblems  of  the  invisible  God,  instead 
of  expressing  an}^  sympathy  with  this  kind  of 
worship,  as  being  well-intended,  even  though 
so  imperfect  in  form,  he  poured  upon  such  a 
man  the  most  scathing  ridicule  and  contempt ; 
that  he  should  actually  bow  down  to  a  part  of 
a  stick  of  wood,  from  another  part  of  which 
he  had  cooked  his  dinner  !  ^ 

The  apostle  Paul,  in  a  more  formal  manner 
than  any  other  of  the  sacred  writers,  has  set 
forth  the  genesis  of  the  religions  of  the  ancient 

»  See  Gal.  v.  20:  1  Cor.  vi.  9,  etc.,  etc 
'Seels,  xliv.  10-17. 


The  Relation  of  the  Wo  rid- Religions.  163 

world  as  they  existed  around  him.^  He  declares 
that  they  all  had  their  origin,  not  in  love  to 
God,  and  the  aspiration  of  the  soul  after  Him, 
but  in  alienation  from  Him.  He  teaches  that 
they  had  arisen  because  men  "did  not  like  to 
retain  God  in  their  knowledge  " ;  that,  instead 
of  representing  the  progress  of  man  in  religion, 
they  expressed  progressive  moral  and  spiritual 
degracUition ;  that,  instead  of  having  their  root 
in  what  was  good  in  man,  they  grew  out 
of  man's  aversion  to  God,  and  his  ungrateful 
ignoring  of  Him.  Instead  of  making  ex- 
cuses for  tlie  multitudes  who  were  in  his  day 
bowing  before  idols,  or  worshiping  various 
objects  in  nature,  he  expressly  declared  that 
the  light  of  nature  is  so  clear  in  its  rev- 
elation of  the  being  and  character  of  God, 
that  the  votaries  of  these  various  idolatrous 
religions  were  without  excuse  for  their  error*. 
It  is  in  full  keeping  with  all  these  re]iresentn- 
tions  of  the  Old  and  Xew  Testaments,  thnt 
the  sacred  Book  closes  with  a  declaration 
which  associates  all  who  in  any  religion  wor- 
ship and  adore  aught  but  the  invisible  Creator, 
with  "liars,  whoremongei-s,  and  murderers"; 
for  it  is  written  that,  equally  with  such  as 
these,  the  idolater  shall  be  excluded  forever 

»  Rom.  1. 19-25. 


164    Handbook  of  Comjyarative  Religion. 

from  the  Holy  City,  and  have  his  portion, 
with  such  like  men,  "  in  the  lake  which  burn- 
eth  with  fire  and  brimstone."  ^ 

]S'or  is  it  merely  the  grosser  forms  of  the 
ethnic  religions  which  are  thus  condemned. 
Ko  distinction  is  made  as  regards  the  fact  of 
condemnation.  One  may  adore  as  a  symbol 
of  Deity,  a  stone  or  a  stick ;  another,  more 
enlightened,  may  adore  a  deified  hero ;  an- 
other still,  may  worship  the  sun ;  but  all  alike 
fall  under  the  same  unsparing  condemnation. 
Nor  has  the  apostle  any  gentler  or  more  toler- 
ant words  for  the  philosophy  which  underlies 
these  various  religions.  On  the  contrary,  he 
asserts  that  as  an  attempt  to  attain  to  the 
knowledge  of  God,  it  had  been  a  failure;^ 
and  that  the  supposed  philosophic  wisdom  of 
the  ancient  Greeks,  Eomans,  and  others,  was 
in  God's  sight  mere  "foolishness."^  In  a 
word,  as  regards  all  forms  of  the  ethnic  re- 
ligions, the  whole  teaching  of  the  Christian 
Scriptures  stands  in  the  most  complete  and 
unqualified  opposition  to  the  modern  view, 
which,  in  a  spurious  charity,  maintains  that  all 
religions  alike  present  a  means,  more  or  less 
perfect,  of  attaining  to  communion  with  God, 
and  in  their  history  afford  cheering  evidence 

»Rev.  xxi.  8.  n  Cor.  i.  21.  n  Cor.  iii.  19. 


The  Relation  of  the  World -Religions.   105 

of  the  ii'rnrliinl  religious  progross  of  the  human 
race. 

Bui  it  will  be  said,  and  truly,  that  such  rep- 
resentations as  the  above  respecting  religions 
characterized  by  idoltary,  cannot  hold  good 
against  the  religion  of  Islam  ;  which,  it  is  sup- 
posed, we  may  therefore  regard  with  a  larger 
degree  of  charity  and  sympathy ;  since  Islam 
everywhere  and  always  protests  against  all 
worship  of  any  other  than  the  one  invisible 
God,  in  as  emphatic  terms  as  Christianity. 
But  if  Mohammedanism  is  happily  strong  in 
its  utterances  on  this  point,  it  is  no  less  em- 
phatic in  its  uncompromising  denial  of  the 
holy  incai'nation  of  the  Son  of  God,  and  of 
atonement  as  made  through  His  sacrilicial 
death.  AYhen  this  is  remembered,  it  will  be 
clear  at  once  that  ^Mohammedanism  falls  under 
no  less  unsparing  condemnation,  in  tlie  Xew 
Testament,  than  the  other  non-Christian  re- 
ligions. For  not  only  are  we  told  that  "  the 
Word  ''  who  "  was  in  the  beginning  with  God  " 
who  "  was  God,"  "  the  only  begotten  Son  which 
is  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father  "  "  became  flesh," ' 
and  also  that  "  His  [God's]  Son  .  .  .  was 
born  of  the  seed,  of  David  according  to  the 
flesh ;  ^    that  to  deny,  as  do  the  followers  of 

'John  i.  1.  14,  18  (R.  v.).  -Kum.  i  3  (K.  v.). 


166    Handbook  of  Co)njjarative  Religion, 

Mokamiiied,  that  Jesus  of  Xazareth  was  the 
Son  of  God  in  the  sense  for  the  affirmation  of 
which  He  was  declared  by  the  high  priest  and 
the  sanhedrin  to  be  guilty  of  blasphemy  and 
was  condemned  to  death/  is  to  deny  the  Father 
also  who  sent  Him  ;  ^  but  we  are  further  taught 
that  "  many  deceivers  are  entered  into  the 
world  who  confess  not  that  Jesus  Christ  is 
come  in  the  flesh.  This  is  a  deceiver  and  an 
antichrist."  ^ 

These  considerations  have  now  prepared  the 
way  for  an  answer  to  the  question  whether  or 
not  it  is  correct,  in  the  light  of  the  facts  which 
the  comparative  study  of  religions  has  brought 
l)efore  us,  to  distinguish  other  religions  from 
the  Christian  religion  as  the  false  from  the 
true.  Only  let  the  question  be  rightly  appre- 
hended. It  is  not,  as  sometimes  assumed, 
whether  other  religions  than  the  Christian  rec- 
ognize important  inoral  and  spiritual  truths. 
xVbout  this  there  is  no  dispute.  Indeed,  ex- 
ce[)t  for  this,  they  would  not  have  had  the 
power  they  have   to   attract  the  millions  of 

'  Matt.  xxvi.  63-65:  Mark  xiv.  61-64;  Luke  xxii.  66-71. 

-1  John  ii.  22.  23.  I'lie  Rev.  Dr.  Robsoii,  of  Aberdeen,  for  many 
years  a  missionary  in  India,  lias  truly  s;iid,— as  illustrating  this 
connection  of  tlie  denial  of  the  Son  with  the  denial  of  the  Father: 
"It  is  of  the  essence  of  Christianity  to  affirm  the  Fatherliood  of 
God.  It  is  of  the  essence  of  Mohanuiiedanism  to  deny  the  Father- 
liood of  God."  British  and  Foreign  Evangelical  Review;  as  quoted 
by  IkmIs  in  MohamiDPr],  BucWah,  and  Christ,  pp.  10.  11. 

'  2  Jolm  7  (u.  V.) ;  and  1  John  iv.  1-;J  (R.  v.)  where  same  Is  Implied. 


Tilt'  Rtdat'ioh.  of  the   Wufld-Jicligto/t.s.    107 

mankind.  Moreover,  it  may  be  remarked  in 
passing,  that  it  is  of  great  importance  that  all 
Christians,  and  missionaries  especially,  recog- 
nize and  heartily  acknowledge  such  truths  as 
they  may  find  more  or  less  clearly  admitted  in 
the  religions  of  those  among  whom  they  labor. 
Let  us  l)y  all  means  acknowledge  witli  thank- 
fulness the  fact  that  Islam  insists  on  the 
unity  and  spirituality^  of  God,  as  opposed  to 
all  polytheism  and  pantheism;  and  no  less, 
on  His  absolute  supremacy  and  sovereignty 
over  all  that  is.  Let  us  rejoice  again,  that 
in  Hindooisni  Ave  find  so  many  intimations 
of  that  other  profound  truth,  of  which  Islam 
seems  never  to  have  caught  a  glimpse,  the  im- 
manence of  God  in  the  world.  Let  us  even 
thank  Buddhism  for  its  continual  insistence 
on  the  utter  vanity  and  the  unsatisfying  na- 
ture of  the  Avorld  and  all  that  is  in  it,  and  for 
its  assertion  of  the  equality  of  all  men,  as 
against  the  intolerable  pretensions  of  caste. 

Kor  have  we  the  least  reason  to  fear,  lest  by 
such  frank  recognition  of  any  truth  to  which 
any  non-Christian  religion  may  give  witness, 
we  detract  aught  from  the  Divine  authority 
and  unique  supremacy  of  Christianity.  If  the 
teaching  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  is  to  be  re- 
ceived, it  were  even  incredible  that  some  frag- 


168    llandhook  of  Comparative  Religion. 

meats  of  spiritual  trutli  should  not  be  found  in 
all  religions.  For  the  teaching  of  the  Word  is 
explicit  that  all  men  alike  have  a  moral  na- 
ture, and  that  humanity  began  its  history  with 
a  true,  if  imperfect,  knowledge  of  God.  We 
are  told  that  the  invisible  things  of  God,  from 
the  time  of  the  creation  itself,  have  been 
clearly  revealed,  'M3eing  understood  by  the 
things  that  are  made  " ;  ^  and  that  men  who 
have  not  the  revealed  law  of  God,  are  yet  "  a 
law  unto  themselves  "  ;  inasmuch  as  the}^  show 
the  operation  of  a  "law  written  in  their 
hearts,"  when  their  thoughts  within  them  ac- 
cuse or  else  excuse  them  for  what  they  have 
done.  ^  l^Loreover,  the  same  Scriptures  teach 
no  less  clearly  that  the  working-  <yf  (rod's  Holy 
Spirit  is  by  no  means  confined  to  those  who 
have  the  revealed  Word,  but  that  the  etei^nal 
Word  "lighteth  every  man.'' ^  And  since 
the  same  Scriptures  also  teach  that  even  be- 
fore God  separated  Israel  to  be  the  special 
vehicle  and  channel  of  His  supernatural  reve- 
lation. His  will  for  our  salvation  was  made 
known  to  the  children  of  men ;  therefore,  in 
the  light  of  all  these  facts,  we  need  not  be  sur- 
prised that  among  religions  other  than  the 
Christian  we  should  find,  as  w^e  do  find,  some 

'Rom.  i.  20.  "Rom.  ii.  14. 15.  'John  i.  9. 


The  Relation  of  the  World- Religions.  109 

vestiges  of  God's  ancient  revelation  and  many 
most  impressive  suggestions  of  t  iths  which 
are  commonly  regarded  as  belonging,  not  to 
natural,  but  to  revealed  religion. 

Then  we  have  further  to  remember  that  by 
the  dispersion  of  the  Jews  after  the  Babylo- 
nian captivity,  in  the  first  instance,  and  after 
that,  by  the  preaching  of  the  apostles  and 
their  associates  and  immediate  successors,  the 
distinctive  facts  of  the  gospel  were  very  widely 
spread  abroad  in  the  world  of  that  time.  That 
such  truths,  so  extensively  proclaimed,  should 
have  everywhere  utterly  perished  from  the 
memory  of  men,  in  those  various  lands  where 
they  labored,  had  been  truly  astonishing ;  and 
the  evidence  is  all  to  the  contrary. 

As  is  well  known,  Aloliammedanism  accepts 
as  infallible  truth  very  much  of  the  history 
and  doctrine  of  the  Old  and  Xew  Testaments. 
Hindooism,  with  its  teaching  concerning  Pra- 
japati,  who  sacrificed  himself  in  behalf  of  the 
gods,  recognized  in  its  most  ancient  days,  the 
doctrine  of  a  Divine  Atoner  and  atonement ; 
and  at  this  present  time,  in  its  doctrine  of  the 
avatars,  confesses  to  the  fact  that  if  the  world 
is  to  be  saved,  an  incarnation  of  the  Deity  is 
required.  These  two  ideas  have  been  strik- 
ingly combined  in  the  Bhagavad  Gita,  where 


17«)    Handhook  of  Co'tnjKU'atAve  Religion. 

Krishna,  as  an  incarnation  of  the  Deity,  is 
represented  as  saying,  in  language  which 
might  be  applied  without  moditication  to  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ :  "  I  am  the  offering ;  I  am 
the  sacrifice  ;  I  am  the  burnt  offering."  ^  The 
poem  is  of  later  origin  than  the  Chinstian  era, 
and  this  teaching  with  regard  to  Krishna,  like 
some  of  the  incidents  of  his  life  as  given  in  the 
Ehagavad  Purana,  may  indicate  faint  recol- 
lections of  Christian  preaching  by  the  apostle 
Thomas,  or  other  early  missionaries  to  India. 
Bat  the  funcUimeutal  idea  thus  expressed  had 
found  striking  ex|)ression  even  in  India  before 
the  incarnation  of  our  Lord ;  as  in  one  of  the 
Brahmanas  previously  cited  :  "  The  Lord  of 
creatures  gave  Himself  for  them,  -  for  He  be- 
came their  sacrifice."^ 

Not  to  multiply  illustrations,  let  it  then  be 
granted,  once  for  all,  that  in  all  the  great  re- 
ligions of  mankind  uiay  be  discovered  more  or 
less  important  fragments  of  Divine  truth  ;  and 
even  of  such  truths  as  are  distinctive  of  Chris- 
tianity. 

But  it  by  no  means  follows  from  this  that 
it  is  therefore  wrong  to  speak  of  the  various 
ethnic  religions  as  "  false,"  and  of  Christianity 

^Bhagavad  Git  a.  ix.  16. 

'I.  e..  tlie  pods;  but  these  were  originally  mortal  men. 

^  Satapatha  Brahmana,  xiv.  3.  2,  1. 


Tht    iiilitttoii  of  the   Woihl-Jic/Hjlon.s.    171 

aloneas  the  .'.^  true.''  religion.  For,  in  the  first 
place,  it  is  to  be  noted  that  even  where  a  truth 
is  recognized  in  any  one  of  the  non-Christian 
religions,  it  is  very  commonly  exaggerated  out 
of  all  proportion  to  other  truths,  or  utterly 
erroneous  inferences  are  drawn  from  it ;  or, 
again,  the  representation  itself  is  distorted,  like 
the  image  of  the  full-orbed  sun  upon  a  tossing 
sea.  Thus,  if  Islam  insists  on  the  unity  of  God, 
as  we  have  seen,  it  misapprehends  this,  as  be- 
ing a  unity  such  as  excludes  the  possibility  of 
a  threeness  of  personality  in  the  one  God.  If, 
again,  it  makes  much  of  His  absolute  power 
and  sovereignty,  it  so  caricatures  this  doctrine 
as  to  make  it  essential  to  believe  that  God  is 
the  author  of  evil,  and  even  when  it  most 
loudly  extols  Him  as  "  the  Merciful  and  the 
Compassionate,"  quite  loses  sight  of  the  depths 
of  His  pardoning  grace  and  loving-kindness. 

Hindooism,  again,  holding  so  firmly  to  the 
truth  of  an  immanence  of  God  in  the  world, 
has  identified  His  relation  to  the  soul  with  His 
relation  to  matter,  has  lost. .sight  of  His  per- 
sonality, and  ])y  making  God  the  agent  in  all 
acting,  makes  Him  to  be  the  author  of  all  sin. 
If  Buddilsni  has  rightly  said  much  of  the  van- 
ity and  unsatisfying  nature  of  all  earthly 
things,  in  doing  this,  it  has  missed  of  the  mo- 


1Y2    Ilandhooh  of  Comparative  Religion. 

mentous  truth  that  the  evil  which  pertains  to 
this  earthly  life,  is  not  because  existence — even 
bodily  existence — is  of  necessity  evil ;  but  is 
because  of  man's  sin,  which  has  turned  what 
God  made  "  very  good  *'  into  evil. 

But  not  only  are  the  truths  wliicli  are  recog- 
nized in  the  various  religions  thus  either  dis- 
torted, or  separated  from  their  proper  place  in 
the  system  of  truth,  but  the  system  of  religious 
teaching  in  Avhich  they  are  made  to  take  some 
place,  in  each  and  every  case,  as  a  system,  is 
diametrically  opposed  to  Christianity.  And 
this  is  the  real  question  as  to  the  truth  or  fal- 
sity of  any  religion  as  compared  with  Chris- 
tianity. It  is  not  Avliether  in  such  religion 
many  religious  trutlis  are  recognized;  it  is 
whethei'  the  system  of  teaching  represented  in 
that  religion,  as  a  whole,  is  true  or  false.  Now 
surely  it  is  quite  inconceivable  that  a  religion, 
for  example,  which  is  based  on  the  denial  of 
the  personality  of  God.  and  therewith  also  of 
man  and  of  his  i-esponsibility  to  God,  and  a 
religion  in  which,  as  in  Christianity,  all  this  is 
affirmed,  can  both  be  true.  It  is  impossible, 
again,  that  a  religion  which  affirms  an  incar- 
nation of  the  Deity  in  order  to  the  salvation 
of  men  through  a  Divine  atonement  for  sin, 
is  affirmed  as  a  historic  fact  and  fundamental 


The  Relation  of  the  World-Iieligions.   173 

truth,  and  a  religious  system  like  that  of  Islam, 
wherein  the  denial  of  the  possibility  of  either 
incarnation  or  atonement  for  sin  is  made  an 
element  integral  and  essential,  can  both  of 
them  be  true.  It  is,  again,  no  less  certain 
that,  i^  ia  one  religion,  as  in  Buddhism,  God 
is  ignored  or  denied,  and  it  is  assumed  as  fun- 
damental truth  that  existence,  everywhere  and 
alwa3^s,  is  of  necessity  an  evil,  and  the  whole 
doctrine  of  salvation  is  based  on  this  assump- 
tion ;  and  if  in  another  religion,  as  in  Chris- 
tianity, we  have  a  system  of  teaching  which 
assumes  the  existence  of  a  personal  God,  the 
(Creator  of  all,  and  teaches  the  original  excel- 
lence of  all  things  as  made  by  Him ;  then  it 
should  be  as  clear  as  the  noonday  that  these 
two  religions  cannot  both  be  True. 

Hence,  being  assured  that  as  an  organized 
and  self-consistent  system  of  related  truths, 
Christianity  is  to  be  held  a  true  religion,  it  is 
not  through  any  lack  of  charity,  but  under  the 
constraint  of  an  imperious  logical  necessity, 
that  we  allirm  that  Islam,  Hindooism,  Bud- 
dhism, Confucianism,  in  a  word,  all  religions 
whatsoever  other  than  that  of  Christ,  must  be 
regarded  as  false.  Howsoever  they  may  all 
incidentally  acknowledge  many  important 
truths,   nevertheless,    as    systems   of   religion^ 


174    Ilandhooh  of  Cornjyamtlce   Relifjion. 

we  must  pronounce    them    false.      Contradic- 
tories cannot  both  be  true. 

Finally,  in  the  light  of  these  facts,  we  are 
now  prepared  to  consider  the  question  so  often 
debated  in  Christian  circles,  whether  men  can 
be  saved  by  other  religions  than  that  of 
Christ.  There  are  many  who  tliink  that  this 
is  quite  possible,  if  only  a  man  live  up  to 
the  injunctions  of  the  religion  which  he  pro- 
fesses ;  and  there  are  many  still  who  deny 
this.  Let  it  be  carefully  observed,  however, 
that  this  question  is  quite  distinct  from  another 
with  which  it  is  often  confounded  ;  namely, 
whether  men  who  are  outwardly  numbered  in 
a  body  professing  other  than  the  Christian 
faith  can  possibly  be  saved.  This  may  safely 
be  said,  to  preclude  any  misconception,  that  it  is 
perfectly  certain  that  whenever  and  wherever 
a  man  truly  repents  of  all  his  sin  and  turns 
unto  God,  he  will  be  saved.  Only  the  ques- 
tion may  fairly  be  raised  just  here,  whether  a 
man  can  repent  of  sinning  against  God,  who, 
like  a  Buddhist,  is  not  assured  of  His  exist- 
ence; or  who,  like  a  Brahman,  is  unable  to 
believe  that  God  is  a  personal  Being.  How- 
ever, the  question  immediately  before  us  is 
not  whether,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  individuals 
not    professedly    Christian    have    ever    truly 


Tliii  Ilelation  of  the  World- ReJigirms.   175 

turned  from  all  sin  unto  God;  but  the  very 
distinct  question  whether  a  man  can  be 
saved  from  sin  here  and  hereafter  ly  means 
of  a  diligent  ohservance  of  the  prescriptions 
of  some  other  religion  than  that  of  Jesvs 
Christ. 

In  answer  to  this  question  we  remark  first 
— what   is   very  little   understood — that   reli- 
gions other  than  the  Christian  do  not  even  pro- 
pose salvation  from  sin  as  the  object  to  be  at- 
tained.    As  has  been  already  fully  shown,  the 
salvation  proposed  by  the  world-religions  is, 
in  every  case,  merely  a  salvation  from  those 
sufferings  here  or  hereafter,  which  are  caused 
by  sin.    Let  it  be  remembered  that,  for  instance, 
the  Mohammedan  idea  of  salvation,  like  that 
of  too  many  nominal  Christians,  is  merely  sal- 
vation from  hell-fire.     The  Hindoo  idea  of  sal- 
vation  is   deliverance   from   the  necessity  of 
going  through  the  eighty-four  lakhs  of  trans-  ■ 
migrations,   and   therewith,   speedier   deliver-  i 
ance  from  suffering  by  the  final  loss  of  self-   ' 
conscious  personality   through   absorption   in 
the  infinite  Brahma.     The  Buddhist  idea  of 
salvation,  in  the  highest  sense  apprehended  by 
the  Buddha,  the  i^arinihhdnd.,  is  to  cease  to 
be    eternally,    to    reach    that    state    wherein 
"  That  by  which  they  say  '  He  is,'  exists  for  him 


176    Handbook  of  Com/parative  Religion. 

no  longer."  ^  Even  though  we  should  grant 
that  any  one  religion  is  adapted  to  the  attain- 
ment of  salvation  in  the  sense  in  which  its 
votaries  understand  that  term,  surely  it  would 
not  follow  that  they  were  therefore  adapted  to 
the  attainment  of  a  salvation  from  sin,  when 
this  is  not  even  contemplated  therein  as  the 
end  of  the  religious  life. 

Again,  to  suppose  that  by  obedience  to  the 
prescriptions  of  any  religion  other  than  the 
Christian,  men  may  attain  to  acceptance  with 
God,  is  to  assume  that  God  can  be  pleased  and 
satisfied  by  actions  and  observances  of  dia- 
metrically opposite  moral  character;  with 
human  sacrifices,  or  with  no  sacrifice;  with 
reliance  upon  His  incarnate  Son,  or  without 
it.  Is  this  conceivable  ?  If  Ave  accept  Chris- 
tianity as  true,  then  we  must  admit  that  it 
teaches  that  the  Divine  verdict  is  that  no  man 
can  possibly  attain  to  salvation  through  efforts 
of  his  own,  and  that  salvation  therefore  is  of 
necessity  through  God's  free  grace  alone.  But 
every  other  religion,  without  exception,  in  so 
far  as  it  teaches  anything  on  the  subject, 
teaches  with  all  possible  emphasis  that  salva- 
tion, of  whatsoever  sort  it  be,  is  to  be  attained 
through  something  done  or  suffered   by  the 

'  Sutta  Xtpdta:  Parayanavagga,  vll.  8. 


The  Relation  of  the  WoHd-Ileligioiis.  177 

man  himself.  Can  these  contradictory  teach- 
ings both  be  true  ? 

Finally,  as  Christians,  we  are  bound  to 
admit  that  for  all  who  honestly  receive  the 
Xew  Testament  as  the  Word  of  God,  this 
question  should  be  regarded  as  settled.  Noth- 
ing could  be  more  explicit  than  the  words  of 
the  apostle  with  regard  to  Jesus  Christ :  "  In 
none  other  is  there  salvation :  for  neither  is 
there  any  other  name  under  heaven,  that  is 
given  among  men,  wherein  we  must  be  saved."  ^ 

This  statement  of  the  apostle,  together 
with  all  the  foregoing  arguments,  is  also  justi- 
lied  historically.  For  it  must  ever  be  borne  in 
mind  that  salvation  consists  essentially,  not  so 
much  in  escaping  the  retributions  of  eternity, 
as  in  the  production  of  a  certain  type  of  char- 
acter, which  is  described  by  the  term  "  holy," 
taken  in  the  biblical  sense  of  that  Avord. 
Xow  there  is  no  want  of  charity  Avhen  we 
affirm  that  among  the  votaries  of  other  re- 
ligions Ave  do  not,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  find  this 
special  type  of  character.  We  doubtless  find 
among  them  all,  here  and  there,  men  who  may 
be  rightly  described  as  brave,  or  generous,  or 
benevolent,  or  moral,  but  for  holiness  we  look 
in  vain.     When  and  where  has  Islam,  for  ex- 

'  Acts  iv.  12.  (R.  V,) 


178    TIandhook  of  Comparative  Religion. 

ample,  ev^er  produced  a  Saint  John?  AYhen 
has  Hindooism  ever  shown  the  world  an 
Isaiah ;  or  Buddhism,  a  Saint  Paul  ?  And  if 
the  world-religions  do  not  develop  such  a  type 
of  character  here  and  now,  what  possible 
reason  is  there  to  believe  that  by  devotion  to 
them  here,  a  man  may  at  last  secure  complete 
deliverance  from  sin,  and  personal  holiness  of 
character  in  the  life  to  come  ? 

The  practical  consequence  of  the  argument 
of  this  book  is  so  evident  that  it  needs  only  to 
be  mentioned.  If  the  differences  between  the 
various  religions  of  the  world  and  the  religion 
of  Jesus  Christ  are  such  as  have  been  herein 
set  forth,  and  if  the  teaching  of  Christianity 
be  accepted  as  undoubted  truth,  then  Chris- 
tian missions  to  the  followers  of  other  religions 
become  a  duty  so  clear  that  it  should  be  self- 
evident.  If  the  words  of  the  Tamil  poet  be- 
fore quoted  be  true,  and 

"  Purification  before  the  great  God 
Is  greater  than  life  and  is  stronger  than  death  ; 
Is  the  hope  of  the  wise  and  the  prize  of  the  saint," 

and  if,  as  both  the  history  of  our  race  and  the 
Holy  Scriptures  clearly  testify,  all  religions 
except  that  of  Jesus  Christ  have  utterly  failed 
to  secure  for  man  this  supreme  blessing,  then 


The  Relation  of  the  Wo  rid- Religions.    1 79 

manifestly  it  is  the  first  duty  of  the  Church  to 
let  all  the  world  know,  without  any  further 
delay,  that  w^hat  neither  the  Buddha,  nor  any 
of  the  deified  heroes  of  liindooism,  nor  Mo- 
hammed, nor  Confucius,  nor  any  other  teacher 
of  religion  has  ever  proved  able  to  do,  has 
been  done  by  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord ;  who  in 
very  truth  saves  His  people  from  their  sins,' 
and  whose  gospel  is  shown  by  the  history  of 
almost  nineteen  hundred  years  to  be  of  a 
truth  "  the  power  of  God  unto  salvation  to 
every  one  that  belie veth."  ^ 

»  Matt.  i.  21.  2  Rom.  i.  16 ;  1  Cor.  I.  24. 


FIKIS. 


Date  Due 

%1S'«« 

1 

Mr  14'^'' 

«•«' 

Mr  9P  ''^ 

pii  '*^'  * ' 

.*  1  0  w 

J2  i;^  11 

Jb  «.q 

'4P 

li^ 

'li-i  2  j  "f-n 

FACUi  TY 

)fe 

ft^iiiimnrr 

^^^^^ 

^ 

|^Qw«|athw||g^ 

=~-*» 
K^'^ 

-r^v 

f) 

